Back in October 2011 Jamie and Frank McCourt settled their dispute over ownership of the Dodgers. At the time it seemed like Jamie got a fairly decent deal. She got $131 million out of it despite the fact that her claims to true joint ownership of the team were somewhat tenuous and despite the fact that, at the time, all of Frank’s debts and the Dodgers’ debts — something on the order of $800 million worth — looked like a sale of the team wouldn’t bring anything close to a windfall. Heck, McCourt looked like he’d maybe — maybe — break even.
But then something hilarious happened: Frank sold the team for $2.15 billion, which was way, way more than Jamie or most other folks figured he’d get for it. When that happened Jamie went running back to court to try to reopen the settlement, claiming fraud and all sorts of other things, but really just wanting a bigger piece of all of that Dodgers money.
The judge ruled yesterday. Sorry, Jamie. From Bill Shaikin at the Los Angeles Times:
Jamie McCourt asked that the divorce settlement be thrown out, alleging Frank McCourt misled her about the value of the team and its assets. In his ruling, Gordon said there was “no credible evidence” to support those allegations and noted that Jamie McCourt had been involved in team and RSN valuations in her capacity as a high-ranking Dodgers executive.
When you think about it, Jamie did herself in. For a couple of years during the divorce fight, Jamie portrayed herself as a true co-owner and a wrongfully-fired Dodgers executive. She even argued for a long time that she actually wanted ownership of the Dodgers when it was all settled, not just a cashout. Then, to turn around and say that she was a mere babe in the woods when it came to complicated things like baseball teams and TV rights and that bad old Frank misled her about it all is pretty much the definition of chutzpah.
Frank McCourt is not my idea of a hero, but gee whiz, he’s got nothing on Jamie in the “can you believe this?” department.