L.A. NOW

Southern California -- this just in

« Previous Post | L.A. NOW Home | Next Post »

Cross-examination focuses on Jamie McCourt's signing of Dodgers ownership paper

September 20, 2010 |  1:53 pm

Jamie McCourt reiterated in court Monday that she did not read an agreement giving her estranged husband sole control of the L.A. Dodgers before signing it.

In cross-examination, Steve Susman, Frank McCourt's attorney, referenced Jamie McCourt's years of practicing law in reminding her that "choosing not to read something is not a legal defense to enforcement of the contract."

Susman then read two words from Jamie McCourt's deposition, in which she was asked why she generally did not read legal documents.

"It’s boring," Jamie McCourt said in the deposition.

As the McCourt divorce trial continued, Jamie McCourt repeated her position the agreement in question was intended to protect the couple's homes from business creditors and nothing more. She did not read the agreement, she said, because "typically, I trusted my lawyer."

The lawyer who drafted the agreement, Larry Silverstein, is scheduled to testify Tuesday.

Susman scoffed at Jamie McCourt's contention earlier in the day that the Dodgers were not a particularly risky investment, given their significant financial losses when the McCourts bought the team in 2004.

"We knew how to fix it," Jamie McCourt said.

"You thought you knew how to fix it," Susman said. "You knew you had a limited amount of time to fix it, didn't you? The loans were coming due in two years. If you didn't succeed in turning it around, whoever signed the guarantees and promissory notes would have been hung out to dry."

"Not necessarily," said Jamie McCourt, who acknowledged that she did not sign for any personal financial liability involving the Dodgers.

Susman displayed a chart entitled "Jamie Reaped the Benefits," citing Frank McCourt's payments of $52 million for residential purchases and $40 million in residential mortgages, all for homes in Jamie's name.

"I don't think it's fair to assume I only reaped the benefits," Jamie McCourt testified. "Frank lived there. They were our homes. … Frank reaped the same benefits that I did."

As her direct examination concluded earlier Monday, Jamie told attorney David Boies that she could not recall discussing the agreement in March 2004 with Silverstein.

She could be specific, she testified, because of a handwritten note reflecting her excitement about the Dodgers' spring training game that day in Vero Beach, Fla.

"We won against Red Sox," the note read, "with Schilling pitching v. Perez, Gagne in game!"

The Perez in question would be Odalis Perez, who won seven games for the Dodgers that season. Schilling won 21 games for the World Series champion Boston Red Sox.

-- Bill Shaikin at Los Angeles Superior Court

Comments 

Advertisement










Video