Clemson Fires a Kill Shot in SC and ACC Files a Brief on a Stay in NC - Clemson vs. the ACC Lawsuits
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 чер 2024
- The Big Mountain has an update on the Clemson vs ACC Lawsuits.
Clemson files for a Partial Summary Judgement in Pickens Co, SC. Could this be the kill shot for this lawsuit?
Also, the ACC files their brief against the Motion to Stay filed by Clemson in Mecklenburg, NC.
The lawsuits against the ACC are heating up and The Big Mountain is your trusted place for updates and analysis!
REMEBER TO SUBSCRIBE - We will be staying on top of these cases for their entirety.
MERCH STORE: thebigmountain.myspreadshop.com/
#ACCfootball #clemsontigers #clemsonfootball - Спорт
The ACC’s claim that the conference accepted the GoR in North Carolina is pure baloney. Each and every member school executed the contract in their OWN state and electronically transmitted it to the conference offices. In the legal realm, where a party to a contract actually signed it matters greatly.
The ACC breached its duties along time ago by failing to do the best thing for its members repeatedly!
I hope Clemson is granted partial summary judgment. Would save money for both parties and taxpayers.
Lol. Do you guys ever sleep?! Thanks for your efforts!
Can Bledsoe rightfully say that the Clemson case should be heard in NC while the FSU case is on hold in NC due to appeal to the NC Supreme Court?
Just because FSU filed and appeal, it won’t stop this case from being heard by Judge Bledsoe. This to may be appealed to the NCSC, but it’s a process.
But if I’m Clemson I would argue that Bledsoe issued a stay in the FSU case until the NCSC rules on the appeal.
The ACC needs to let FSU/Clemson leave.
If you were a party to a multi-billion dollar contract and two parties in the contract wanted to walk away from the contract would you just let them?
The State of Florida will not hand over its Sovereign Authority to govern Florida State University for a Justice aka Judge in the State of North Carolina. The Judge in North Carolina will not pick up that case again until 2025. The local concern & its impact is “Wake Forest” & “Duke”. The ACC is still addressing most of the same issues,but they’ve flipped their arguments. FSU had to comply with the Sunshine Law. That is the reason everyone got a front seat for Florida State University Board of Trustee meeting’s. When Maryland left they payed the exit fee & the ACC kept their last Athletic year’s $$ funds. That could be a “Precedent”. Maryland came into the B1G broke, Florida State University is far from broke.
I don't think it is wise to hang your hat on the Sovereign Authority (Immunity) argument. We will know soon enough when the NCSSC rules in a few weeks.
Maybe a stupid question but, since the property in question, tv rights for Clemson home games, is in SC, would that have any weight on the venue location?
Not a dumb question at all.
It could have weight and that is an issue that FSU has brought to the court in Leon Co, FL. So far the judge in FL has shown he is very interested in the “taking of FL property”.
This very well could be a significant issue in SC as well.
Isn’t Clemson’s best argument is that the ACC doesn’t have the right to keep Clemson s media rights if they are no longer in the conference? The exit fee is $120 M. Clemson should be able to pay the exit fee and take thrust media rights. ACC would keep rights to home games played while in the conference.
Go Big Mountain!
The ACC complaining about "misdirection" with Clemson's filing is really a hoot given the ACC's filing before FSU. The ACC is trying to have it's cake and eat it too. Does anyone else find it funny that the ACC has not given an official number to either FSU or Clemson? They're (ACC) doing their best to keep their two prime schools in a conference they do not want to be in. Sadly, I had hope that Judge Bledsole would be fair but it appears to me that he is the head chef in the NC kitchen.
If what the ACC asserted is correct it is actually pretty clearly a misdirection. In one of the ACC filings they claim that Clemson had asked to begin negotiations with an assurance that there would be no legal action taken. The ACC agreed and they were hammering out the details when Clemson suddenly filed their suit. As for Judge Bledsole, he is an honorable and fair man. He will make his decisions based on the law as they apply to the facts. To claim otherwise is slanderous.
@@elliottcrews4997if this is true, then why would Clemson sue. Is it possible the ACC was not negotiating in good faith?
@@williamsheen837 According to what the ACC said in it's filing negotiations hadn't begun yet. They were putting the details of an agreement assuring Clemson that they wouldn't go to the courts if they negotiated when Clemson filed. It will be interesting to see how each side paints this picture. We will see.
Stop hitting the desk, Jay lol
Like always he's just stumping for the ACC case.
It’s a penalty and that’s where the ACC will lose
McKenzie is generally correct that motions for summary judgment/partial summary judgment are rarely granted. That’s because it’s rare that a dispute involves no genuine issues of material fact that bear on whether the judgment should be granted. That said, there is a subset of disputes that involve only questions of law. Disputes such as the interpretation (construction) of a statute or the terms of a contract. That Clemson’s motion is for partial summary judgment is notable. It suggests the motion was narrowly crafted such that it only asks for a legal interpretation of the GOR (presumably the claim by Clemson that based on the GOR’s unambiguous language it only applies to schools that are in the conference and has no application when they leave). If the court agrees with CU that the issue is purely a legal one, and that the interpretation urged by CU (which CU undoubtedly argues is the only interpretation) is correct, and finally that a ruling on this issue will simplify the issues in the case that left to be tried, it should grant CU’s motion for PSJ. Using shorthand, that the GOR doesn’t travel with departing members then becomes “the law of case”, and its application to the remaining issues can go a long way towards facilitating a settlement.
Who knows what will happen at this point. Clemson obviously found something in the contract that made them push this in my view. The judge will see the exact language and will make the determination. This has been the wildest offseason I can remember.
Yes, it has been.
We certainly started our pod at the right time.
Lots to discuss!
@@TheBigMountainPodcast you all have done great. Wait until FSU/Clemson settle and then in my view it’ll turn quickly to NC political theater. There is going to be no shortage of stories I promise you.
The partial summary judgment makes sense in this scenario because interpretation of the verbiage of in the redacted document is literally their entire case. If it says what Clemson thinks, case closed and no additional money wasted by either party or the state. If the judge disagrees with Clemson’s claim of interpretation, Clemson has no real case and it gets dropped. Seems like a great thing for both parties
Absolutely nothing new in this video,