You will read "Sports & Entertainment - Endorsement Contracts" of your textbook. Then you will answer the following questions: What is a condition?What type of condition is the morals clause? Why do you or don't you think the courts should be utilized to resolve controversies over whether the morals clause had been violated?

just to know this is the part that we have to read in our textbook

Endorsement Contract

Sports marketing involves the use of famous athletes to promote the sale of products and services in our economy. Should an athlete's image be tarnished by allegations of immoral of illegal conduct, a company could be subject to financial losses and corporate embarrassment. Endorsement contracts may extend for multiyear periods, and should a "morals" issue arise, a company would be well served to have had a broad morals clause in its contract that would allow the company at its sole discretion to summarily terminate the endorsement contract. Representatives of athletes, on the other hand, seek narrow contractual language that allows for termination of endorsement contracts only upon the indictment for a crime, and they seek the right to have an arbitrator, as opposed to the employer, make the determination as to whether the morals clause was violated. Tennis star Maria Sharapova's sponsorship contracts were suspended by Porsche and Nike after her revelation that she failed a drug test. And, NFL running back Adrian Peterson's endorsement contracts were canceled after he injured his four-year-old son by spanking him with a wooden switch. Nike, RadioShack, and other sponsors ended their relationships (with an estimated value of $10 million a year) with cyclist Lance Armstrong after he admitted taking performance-enhancing drugs.

Can the courts be utilized to resolve controversies over whether a "morals clause" has been violated? If so, is the occurrence of a morals clause violation a condition precedent or a condition subsequent?