Gerald Forsythe and Forsythe Racing have moved to have Paul Tracy’s lawsuit against them dismissed. The argument for dismissal is:
Plaintiff alleges that “a true and accurate copy of the Second Extension is attached to the Complaint”…but the referenced attachment is unsigned, and nowhere in the complaint is any allegation that Defendants ever executed the document upon which Plaintiff rests its claims.
This “Second Extension” stems from a letter extending the contract from May of 2006. Forsythe is arguing that PT’s termination clause only provided pay through the 2006 season, because this latter extension was never signed, thus is apparently nothing more than some paper. Not only does Forsythe claim that the extension was never signed, they have a ton of precedent in their motion to dismiss. In other words, if lawyering is all about confusing the other lawyer, I couldn’t be a lawyer.
If, in fact, the second extension was never signed, I’m trying to figure out how PT was paid at all in the 2007 season. Not only, as previously mentioned, was his contract breached by not driving a Lola, he was only supposed to be paid through November 1, 2006! GF should countersue for any pay PT may have received otherwise. He may be flipping hamburgers and hot dogs to pay Uncle Jerry back!
If PT doesn’t have a signed copy of this second letter somewhere in his filing cabinet, he may have no claim whatsoever. Similarly, he should strongly consider firing his representation if his party was running on the assumption that this “second extension” was legally binding but never got a signed copy of it for their records.
That said, there may be some sort of precedent where no signatures count as a signature. I’m no lawyer.