FSU vs The ACC | Page 54 | Syracusefan.com

FSU vs The ACC

That might work short term but won’t they be even angrier the next 10 years now? They could have taken the short term fire and next season all is well.
Are they doing more than the bare minimum to pursue the lawsuit?

Filing appeases the yahoos and they can blame the system for any delays in making a quick exit. Then, they hope that they'll be in the playoffs often over the next couple seasons so they can quietly say "nevermind" and no one will care if they just run out the ACC contract.
 
Are they doing more than the bare minimum to pursue the lawsuit?

Filing appeases the yahoos and they can blame the system for any delays in making a quick exit. Then, they hope that they'll be in the playoffs often over the next couple seasons so they can quietly say "nevermind" and no one will care if they just run out the ACC contract.
There are those pesky lawyers' fees and court costs.
 
There are those pesky lawyers' fees and court costs.

And moreso - the countersuit (which was actually filed FIRST) by the ACC vs FSU.

They don't hafta drop their case, just because FSU's has a zero point zero chance of success.
 
Are they doing more than the bare minimum to pursue the lawsuit?

Filing appeases the yahoos and they can blame the system for any delays in making a quick exit. Then, they hope that they'll be in the playoffs often over the next couple seasons so they can quietly say "nevermind" and no one will care if they just run out the ACC contract.
Discovery will need to be pursued, which is likely to be expensive. Very expensive.

FSU should hope that both courts throw out the case on summary judgement. (Technically, the Florida court should dismiss the case and defer to the NC court and allow the NC court to throw out the case). Just one fan's opinion.
 
Discovery will need to be pursued, which is likely to be expensive. Very expensive.

FSU should hope that both courts throw out the case on summary judgement. (Technically, the Florida court should dismiss the case and defer to the NC court and allow the NC court to throw out the case). Just one fan's opinion.

As long as there is a 'question of fact' a judge will not dismiss on summary judgement. Only after the depositions, full discovery, etc. is performed, and then afterwards no question of fact existing, the judge then may dismiss on SJ.
 
As long as there is a 'question of fact' a judge will not dismiss on summary judgement. Only after the depositions, full discovery, etc. is performed, and then afterwards no question of fact existing, the judge then may dismiss on SJ.
If I recall, the ACC responded to the FL lawsuit and included a request for summary judgment with an alternative to set aside the case pending the NC suit results.

The ACC contract requires all suits are subject to NC venue and law. Further, FSU's complaint is conclusion stated as fact with no substantive meat for the court to hear the case. Under contract law, a bad contract deal is not sufficient to be heard. Under copyright law, FSU has even less of an argument. FSU can revise their complaint; though, from all sources I am aware of, there is no more substance than was already included in the complaint. Any revision may weaken FSU's present arguments.

And lots of other points discussed as nauseum on this site.
 
HtownOrange i think you’ll appreciate this take here:

I read the link to his full analysis, he shreds FSU. He includes the comments that the FSU presidents and board were well qualified to make decisions and that the complaint and amendment lack substance.

Great find.

With so many legal writers coming to the same conclusions as the attorneys on this board, the excellent law schools represented by P5 teams, conference lawyers, and network lawyers all concluding the same thing, one us left to ponder how a judge does not recommend sanctions - even temporary disbarment - for such a frivolous suit.
 
I read the link to his full analysis, he shreds FSU. He includes the comments that the FSU presidents and board were well qualified to make decisions and that the complaint and amendment lack substance.

Great find.

With so many legal writers coming to the same conclusions as the attorneys on this board, the excellent law schools represented by P5 teams, conference lawyers, and network lawyers all concluding the same thing, one us left to ponder how a judge does not recommend sanctions - even temporary disbarment - for such a frivolous suit.
From your legal lips...
 
FSU
The Simpsons GIF by MOODMAN
 
I read the link to his full analysis, he shreds FSU. He includes the comments that the FSU presidents and board were well qualified to make decisions and that the complaint and amendment lack substance.

Great find.

With so many legal writers coming to the same conclusions as the attorneys on this board, the excellent law schools represented by P5 teams, conference lawyers, and network lawyers all concluding the same thing, one us left to ponder how a judge does not recommend sanctions - even temporary disbarment - for such a frivolous suit.
Exactly. Before I was banned from Warchant, I used to get a lot of laughs reading Noles fans whining about how the ACC conspired against FSU by helping Wake Forest beat them. I think my favorite one was (paraphrased) 'They invited us to be their football king and now they won't let us win enough to rule.'
 
Exactly. Before I was banned from Warchant, I used to get a lot of laughs reading Noles fans whining about how the ACC conspired against FSU by helping Wake Forest beat them. I think my favorite one was (paraphrased) 'They invited us to be their football king and now they won't let us win enough to rule.'

Awesome. I suppose they didn't watch the BC game this year, I think there are still flags laying on the field against BC the refs were too tired to pick up.
 
I call for all the B12 idiots and all the FSU idiots who have been posting non-stop about the imminent demise of the ACC to do the honorable thing and retire from the Internet immediately. And never return.

FSU's chancellor, BOT, legal counsel and AD should also resign immediately and be forced to get a tattoo that says "I am a moron' on their foreheads.

Fair is fair.

You Clemson idiots are next. Get ready.
 
I call for all the B12 idiots and all the FSU idiots who have been posting non-stop about the imminent demise of the ACC to do the honorable thing and retire from the Internet immediately. And never return.

FSU's chancellor, BOT, legal counsel and AD should also resign immediately and be forced to get a tattoo that says "I am a moron' on their foreheads.

Fair is fair.

You Clemson idiots are next. Get ready.
Reasonable
 
I call for all the B12 idiots and all the FSU idiots who have been posting non-stop about the imminent demise of the ACC to do the honorable thing and retire from the Internet immediately. And never return.

FSU's chancellor, BOT, legal counsel and AD should also resign immediately and be forced to get a tattoo that says "I am a moron' on their foreheads.

Fair is fair.

You Clemson idiots are next. Get ready.
Allow it.gif
 
I call for all the B12 idiots and all the FSU idiots who have been posting non-stop about the imminent demise of the ACC to do the honorable thing and retire from the Internet immediately. And never return.

FSU's chancellor, BOT, legal counsel and AD should also resign immediately and be forced to get a tattoo that says "I am a moron' on their foreheads.

Fair is fair.

You Clemson idiots are next. Get ready.
Dude from West Virginia is the top of that list.
 
Twitter link to the decision from our board.

The subtle point is that FSU won the matter of the fiduciary. This likely destroys FSU's and now Clemson's claim that the ACC has a fiduciary relationship. I have not read the decision, but the court ruling that the existence of a contract does not prove the fiduciary relationship* undercuts FSU's claims that the ACC owed to FSU a special duty of care (i.e. FSU has to make the same money as the SEC and B1G). Likewise, the substance of Clemson's claims were the same, though much better drafted.

Just my take on the news.



*A fiduciary relationship is much more legally binding than general contract relationships. Think of a trustee managing a trust v. contracts at arms length. In the trust, the trustee has a much higher level of legal responsibility to the beneficiary, whereas in a contract, both parties are presumed to have entered into the deal knowingly and willingly.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,616
Messages
4,715,910
Members
5,909
Latest member
jc824

Online statistics

Members online
193
Guests online
2,288
Total visitors
2,481


Top Bottom