Judge Rules on FSUs Motion to Dismiss or Stay in North Carolina - ACC vs FSU Lawsuits
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 апр 2024
- Judge Bledsoe gave his order and opinions on FSUs Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Stay Mecklenburg, NC. This can be viewed as a win for the ACC as the lawsuit will move forward in North Carolina, but FSU was given a dismissal on the Fiduciary Duty complaint from the ACC.
The fellas talk about the opinions of the judge and the areas that may have surprised them in his rulings.
The ACC FSU war is escalating, and The Big Mountain is your trusted place for updates and analysis!
REMEBER TO SUBSCRIBE - We will be staying on top of the NC and FL cases for their entirety.
MERCH STORE: thebigmountain.myspreadshop.com/
#ACCfootball #fsufootball #floridastatefootball 
Спорт
the acc claiming victim is quite literally turning my vision red today.
The ACC is ahead, but I think they’ll be 3 TD’s behind after Florida. I’ve heard too much from the Florida State side about foul play to not think this gets settled to FSU’s advantage.
Why does it not surprise me that a NC judge rules for a NC organization? I had really hoped that he would be more impartial or at least take the time to learn Florida law. If he did that he would know that LEGALLY FSU could take no action against the ACC until the BOT authorized it. It does not matter who says what until the BOT gives their approval all the speculation and fan wishes are moot. I will not be surprised is the Florida judge rules like that. In the end this case is either going to be settled or will go to federal court.
What exactly do you think the judge did that indicated partiality? I'll call BS. The judge ruled based on the law. He is a business court judge with an Ivy League law degree and many years of experience. Just because a judge makes a ruling we don't like doesn't mean he is showing favoritism. Nothing Judge Bledsoe did was unexpected or outside the most probable outcome.
The ACC has been asleep at the wheel for years now, this is all for nothing, the ACC as a football conference is over...any member school that cares about football is getting out, what choice do they have? Die a slow financial death with this horrible contract?
Thanks guys, but I don’t see this as a huge win for the ACC. We all know that the likelihood in court of something getting dismissed is tiny, so we shouldn’t be surprised that the judge didn’t dismiss the case. But he did dismiss the only part that had real teeth, the part of FSU having fiduciary duties.
Yes. Dismissal is tiny.
But there were a few interesting pieces to this one.
Judge Bledsoe made it known that he wants full control. We shall see.
If Leon county moves forward with a trial, and there is dueling cases and maybe a third in Pickens county, then it is only a matter of time before FSU & Clemson buy themselves out, and if the NC case is not favorable, then UNC might be stuck if ESPN takes up their option until 2036!!
not a big surprise. a good ol boy from unc, sides withthe acc, and finds reasons to substantiate his order...tobacco road mafia strikes again
More like, not a big surprise that a honorable, seasoned and well qualified judge makes rulings based on the facts that were heavily in favor of the ACC position. The idea that judges are in the pocket of one side or another based on where they went to school and / or some "tobacco road mafia" conspiracy theory is just ridiculous.
@@elliottcrews4997 yeah. Sure. Keep telling yourself that. LoL
@@gustavovz8431 that’s right just keep finding excuses for everything in like that doesn’t go your way
Excited for tomorrow. all eyes on Leon county
For sure.
It’s about to get boring or VERY INTERESTING!
@@TheBigMountainPodcast I’d say it was more than interesting
It was a bad day for the ACC. The FSU lawyers were loaded for bear. The judge had massive binders of case law that he researched himself.
Outstanding job, guys. I have several comments and they are general in nature.
First, the judge properly swatted away most of FSU's procedural arguments. I am not criticizing FSU's counsel. I might have made the very same arguments if I were representing FSU. My theory on these types of arguments is that an advocate needs to give a judge a reason to rule for his client, once the judge believes that the lawyer's client should win. This judge is not yet persuaded that FSU should "win", and therefore all these technical arguments failed. It's still early so perhaps FSU can still persuade the judge of the justness of its cause. (People forget that judges are humans.)
Second, I find the judge's dismissal of one count of the ACC's complaint to be an important signal to the Florida courts, that he will treat FSU fairly, and is not some sort of "homer" judge. Frankly, the biggest reason for the Florida court to deny the ACC's motion to stay the Florida proceeding is that North Carolina courts cannot be trusted. No one will say this publicly, but if the Florida court feels comfortable with the North Carolina judge, then the chances of a stay being granted improve substantially.
Third, we are now getting into the area of the law called "Conflicts of Laws". So the first question is can a North Carolina court make a decision based upon Florida law? The answer is Yes, it can. So could a North Carolina court find Florida statutory or case law to be dispositive? Yes, it could. I do not know the North Carolina case law on "choice of law" questions, but that is what the North Carolina court will look to in deciding which state's law to apply in deciding the controversy.
Finally, I continue to believe that the Clemson filing makes a stay of the Florida proceeding more likely, because it is better for everyone to have one "trial" rather than 3 separate "trials".
Great points. We really appreciate the depth and understanding of the processes here.
Very interesting about the stay in FL due to the Clemson filing. It certainly seems as if the Judge was making this point in his opinions on the motion to stay in NC.
We always look forward to you comments and again you didn’t disappoint!
This will all be greatly reduced when/if ESPN puts all their eggs in the New Disney College Football Conference (SEC). The ACC has made clear that it is glad to be a marginal football conference by its action in the CFP negotiations and its content on its premier sports network. Schools like FSU and Clemson need to leave if the wish to remain football centric. All that’s left to be determined is how much is the shakedown fee.
All ACC is trying to do is delay and hold on until July 1 when the new 3 join so they don’t trigger ESPN renegotiation. Right now it’s all roadblocks to cause delay because if FSU/Clemson leave by 6/30. ACC is toast.
Court proceeding move slowly. The idea that any of this will be wrapped up in a year, much less 3 months isn't realistic at all. Any rulings made at this point are surely going to be appealed by the losing side. This could go on for several years.
ACC only hope is for the Leon county Jude to order a stay, until completion of the Mecklanburg county case is over!
Why would that be their only hope? Even if he didn't and proceeded with the case in Leon County we don't know how either court might rule.
We would think a stay is more likely in FL over NC.
A stay would be a big victory for ACC. The FL hearing should be outstanding!
No chance!$! Florida will get to the deposition phase and literally leave for free!!
Every time JY says "hold water" I think of Joe Pesci in My Cousin Vinny.
That is phenomenal. One of the greatest movies ever and very proud to be associated with it!
We will even try and do it with a Pesci voice next time.
surprised you thought the fiduciary duty claim being dismissed was a big deal. i just assumed it was a ridiculous throw in from the jump
i also don't think the dismissal of FSU's motion to dismiss/stay was a big deal. maybe i'm naive, but i don't think a judge in either state is going to blatantly disregard the law in favor of one party or the other. it all comes down to the june 30, 2027 date, the 2021 espn agreement amendment (aka extension of the 9-year option to 2025), whether a vote was required for that, whether the gor must be amended to include said 2021 espn agreement amendment, and if the espn agreement does, in fact, state that it only requires the rights of "member institutions" and not something more similar to "all institutions who signed the GoR"...
because if Florida law wanted it to say FSU only waived their sovereign immunity in "all Florida courts", then it would've said "all Florida courts" instead of "all courts". in that *same exact vein*, if espn and the acc wanted the espn agreement to apply to all GoR-signing institutions, then the contract would say that. Right?!
if any FSU fan is discussing any issue other than those - unless there is actual evidence of fraud and self-dealing, which i doubt - i don't listen to them. i'm not here for fantasy land and conspiracies
not surprised the judge kept the case in NC. only thing FSU had a real chance on was if the ratification vote didn't count. and, to be frank, i'm still a bit stunned that the "law" says organizations don't have to follow their bylaws if they correct it at some future date. is there a statute of limitations on that? or can organizations just do whatever the heck they want, whenever they want and "fix" it later? just sounds...dangerous
would have been interesting to see what the judge ruled had FSU filed suit first (while i personally don't think it sways the case too much either way, definitely an unforced error by FSU in getting beaten to the courthouse). i think FSU has leverage with the espn agreement becoming public in the Florida court, but that's only if the judge rules it can proceed in Florida (maybe the Florida AG gets involved again if it gets consolidatedto NC). no clue on the sovereign immunity stuff there, or what the judge might due given the deference to "first filed"
@4:27 JY, you are *still wrong* about your "reading" of the GoR. You are conflating two separate issues.
Issue 1: In the previous episode, you read the GoR to "prove" your point on whether or not the ACC still owns FSU/Clemson's rights after FSU/Clemson claimed the ESPN Agreement says it only applies to the media rights of "Member Institutions". Clearly you cannot read the GoR language to determine the language of the ESPN Agreement, just like you wouldn't read Dr. Seuss and claim you know the contents of War and Peace. We know the GoR explicitly states it only involves the media rights required to perform the obligations of the ESPN Agreement. So *if* the ESPN Agreement says what FSU/Clemson claim, then they have an argument.
Issue 2: In this episode, you read the judge's ruling of his interpretation of the GoR and how it granted the ACC the right to sue FSU without holding a vote as required per ACC bylaws. But then you claimed that the judge read the GoR the same way you did? You weren't discussing the ACC's ability to sue FSU first, nor was the judge discussing the term length of the GoR and whether it applied to FSU/Clemson once they leave they conference. Obviously that is something that the two sides will argue in court at a later date and that the judge will have to rule on eventually, so he couldn't possibly be ruling on it now.
Lastly, I never called you an "ACC homer". Just said your opinions seem to align more favorably with the ACC's. And...no change there after this episode.
You correctly state that it was two separate issues in the GoR, but the fact that the judges interpretation Aligned with JYs was the point of the comment.
For some, any comment made on our videos that does not agree in its entirety with FSUs arguments is heard as being against FSU in totality. (Not you per se).
As we have said many times, we are here for a discussion, and many viewers seem to appreciate that.
We always appreciate discussions and dialogue.
Thx for your continued comments and views and hope you continue to enjoy our content, even if you disagree with us.
@@TheBigMountainPodcast But JY's point was wrong. haha. That's *my* point.
What JY read the previous episode, and what he claimed the judge agreed with him on in this episode were different things.
I enjoy the FSU content and generally agree with most of what you guys say. It's hard to find a non-FSU/non-acc outlet discuss this topic that isn't also mind numbingly bad. So, just be honest and don't blatantly mislead viewers like in this particular instance.
As for other fans giving you all a hard time, well, sure. But they exist everywhere and when you put stuff out in the public - such as this podcast - it's to be expected. C'est la vie.
Steve sounds more non partial. Jy sounds very biased. You are not down the middle. This is exactly what you would expect. Again. This just means that the judge believes that the case should be heard in nc. Fl judge will do the same and case will go federal
Biased towards who?
A business court of law?
@@TheBigMountainPodcast JY is not very self aware. Whether you intend to or not intend to you come across as very pro ACC. you can make arguments on the facts but your demeanor, facial expressions, tone and words chosen when you speak about FSU are very negative regarding FSU. Please be open to other people's perception.
Steve does a great job even if it FSU arguments don't have any merit from his viewpoint, he seems very objective and does not trash either side. Good observations Steve.
@@TheBigMountainPodcast you claim you are calling it down the middle but doesn't appear that way. I
This Big Mountain show will not age well!! ACC is Shady AF!!
Having dueling cases is not at all surprising. Actually, Steve has been saying this is a likelihood for quite a while, unlike many other commentators.
We firmly believe this is going to be settled, and there won’t be a winner or loser.
@@TheBigMountainPodcast Respectfully disagree!! The ACC’s Version of GOR was null and void in 2021 with Shady Phillips not informing members of details with renegotiations with ESPN. Judge Bledsoe of NC who sided with FSU, And no breach of fiduciary duties!!!
Understood. We shall see.
@@TheBigMountainPodcastyup. this is just like the pac12 lawsuits. there will be no true winners cause all parties will ultimately have to determine settlement.
There is only one logical conclusion to Mecklenburg County. The ACC won 95% of what they wanted. There are four possible conclusions depending on what the Leon County Judge says.
1: Judge accepts the case. Makes a settlement more likely.
2: Judge dismisses the case. In which case, ACC has no reason to settle: Unless FSU and Clemson agree to pay $572m plus court costs & legal fees,
3: Federal Court: Both FSU and Clemson are stuck in the ACC until 2026 at the earliest.A risk to all involved ( especially the ACC, because ESPN will not extend, because of the uncertainty involved.
4: Judge stays the case: A big risk for the ACC: Do they settle or gamble? I actually think this is the most fair solution.