Agree.
I have a golf group of roughly 12 "regulars", 8 of whom are attorneys and most are fans/alums of the SEC schools except 1 guy from ND and another from Minnesota. None of them have much interest in this case so I asked them the "why" questions. First question, will attorneys take on lawsuits that they cannot win. A: yes but an ethical attorney will advise the client in advance. If the client wants to proceed, then the attorney (in some cases) will serve as legal counsel. Q: Why would somebody incur the expenses of an apparently unwinnable case? A: they are not looking to win but hoping the other side will cave in and negotiate a settlement. less expensive and it keeps things out of the public eye.
And a job well done, sir. Confirms my suspicions too.I have a golf group of roughly 12 "regulars", 8 of whom are attorneys and most are fans/alums of the SEC schools except 1 guy from ND and another from Minnesota. None of them have much interest in this case so I asked them the "why" questions. First question, will attorneys take on lawsuits that they cannot win. A: yes but an ethical attorney will advise the client in advance. If the client wants to proceed, then the attorney (in some cases) will serve as legal counsel. Q: Why would somebody incur the expenses of an apparently unwinnable case? A: they are not looking to win but hoping the other side will cave in and negotiate a settlement. less expensive and it keeps things out of the public eye.
Bear in mind, these were attorneys speaking and we were in the 19th hole (prior to this arctic front). So the conversation drug on for much longer than implied above. I did you the courtesy of translating from lawyer speak to engneer speak so save me hours of typing and you hours of reading.
It's a foul hook, but it may bring the fish into the boat.
Bear in mind, these were attorneys speaking and we were in the 19th hole (prior to this arctic front). So the conversation drug on for much longer than implied above. I did you the courtesy of translating from lawyer speak to engneer speak so save me hours of typing and you hours of reading.
Isn't that what @stinger78 said?
He’s conditioned by all of those years billing by the quarter hour.
He wants to eliminate every loophole, every possible misinterpretation or trap that can occur, accurately capturing the nuance of the question, while meticulously and precisely answering when his wife asked, “Where were you last night?”
Yep! But FSU is so determined to get out, it can't see straight. It wants the money and ND will bring its own.
Why doesn’t the ACC allow teams to negotiate private, say, 4th tiers agreements, to stream or delay broadcast games? Granted, this may diminish ESPN’s earning potential a bit, but I doubt much. Yet it might bring an extra $5M to a team with a large following.
No idea. But let FSU pay $500M to the ACC, exit ... and welcome ND, their NBC contract, and a revised GOR.
This almost certainly ends in a settlement. FSU wants to get out for far less than 572 million dollars and they probably will, whether it's through a settlement or through a court ruling on the actual penalties that they must pay.
As I said in a much earlier post, the AG can request anything she wants. That doesn’t mean the ACC even has to acknowledge the request.
No. The contract is between the ACC and ESPN. The ACC is a separate legal entity and has no obligation to the citizens of Florida.
I thought you were talking about the highlighted GOR agreement. That is between FSU and the ACC.
To be honest, I'm confused now what we're all talking about. There is a difference between the two. I'm not sure the AG has a right to the GOR, but FSU should.
If FSU is a legal signatory then I would think they do, but their ability to disclose details may be limited by an NDA which we do not have access to.