Stan Kroenke Battles Financial Disclosure to Missouri Supreme Court



Getty Images

Rams owner Stan Kroenke spends a lot of money preventing people from knowing how much money he has.

Via Joël Currier from St. Louis Post-Expedition, Kroenke asked the Missouri Supreme Court to overturn a july decision that he must produce documents regarding his net worth in the litigation arising from the Rams’ move in 2016.

The motion filed Thursday comes after an intermediate appeals court quickly dismissed Kroenke’s efforts to challenge the ruling last month.

Kroenke is prepared to produce his financial statements for the past three years, but he wants to protect information related to businesses unrelated to Aries and / or the enormous fortune of his wife, Ann Walton, a multi-billion dollar Wal-Mart heiress.

The trial court ruling targets information about “any entity owned in whole or in part or directly or indirectly”, as well as federal income tax returns that Kroenke “filed jointly with his wife.”

In addition to the Rams, Kroenke owns the NHL Colorado Avalanche, NBA Denver Nuggets, Premier League Arsenal and MLS Colorado Rapids.

If Kroenke fails, don’t be surprised if he tries to get the U.S. Supreme Court involved. The case has already landed on the role of the nation’s highest court, thanks to an NFL effort to force the case to arbitration – to prevent a jury of average citizens from hearing the evidence and determining the responsibility through a trial that takes place in open court.

The current petition focuses only on the required disclosure of financial information by Kroenke. The July ruling also clears the release of financial information from Cowboys owner Jerry Jones, Patriots owner Robert Kraft, Giants co-owner John Mara, former Panthers owner Jerry Richardson and commissioner Roger Goodell.

The judge decided to authorize the release of the financial information after finding that clear and convincing evidence had been presented that these people had acted fraudulently, opening the door to a possible award of punitive damages against them. Punitive damages cannot be properly determined without knowing the amount it will take for the checker to view the obligation as punishment.



Comments are closed.