Article 13 NBA Constitution: TERMINATION OF OWNERSHIP OR MEMBERSHIP: Ownership may be terminated by 3/4 vote of Govs' for any of 10 reasons
Only term that applies: (a) Willfully violate any of the provisions of the Constitution and By-Laws, resolutions, or agreements of the Ass.
This term may apply also: (d) Fail or refuse to fulfill its contractual obligations to the Ass, its Members, Players, or any other third party in such a way as to affect the Association or its Members adversely.
Other than sections A & D I don't see the other sections applying to Sterling in terms of termination.
Well Sterling is absolutely screwed, I found what I was looking for.
After the 3/4 vote, Sterling will get a notice in writing. He then can & must meet in front of the Board with counsel. He will be allowed to put on evidence of mitigation in an effort to persuade the Board of his position. The Board will listen to all the evidence & vote again.
If the Board votes for termination/sale by 3/4 after hearing from Sterling the vote is essentially final. The decision is deemed final "and each Member and Owner waives any and all recourse to any court of law to review any such decision."
Article 14 Sec J states in part "..each Member and Owner waives any and all recourse to any court of law to review any such decision."
This means Sterling has waived his right to sue in court over the forced sale. So now we know he has waived his rights in both ban & sale.
Once Sterling is officially ousted the Commissioner shall be in full control and management of the team. The Commissioner shall make ALL decisions for the team. Including liquidation and or sale.
Article 15 Alternative to Termination: With a 2/3 board vote, the Board may waive termination & invoke a fine (no cap on the fine).
After a quick review of the NBA by-laws the Board has very broad powers to terminate ownership & Sterling has waived his right to sue. What this means is Sterling has to persuade a Judge to set aside this clause of the by-laws in order for Sterling to sue. Uphill battle.
Again, must view the Ban & Termination of Ownership as two different events & in both events Sterling has waived his right to sue.
Also, there is NO arbitration clause Sterling can take advantage of. In relation to the ban, the bylaws name Silver as the arbitrator.
Then once he gets voted out by the Board, if he wants to sue the board, he must convince a Judge to rule the waiver of his rights to sue was not a lawful waiver. I don't know how a Judge would agree to that considering Sterling had attorneys & is an attorney himself.