Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Conference Realignment
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ThatGuy" data-source="post: 1006389" data-attributes="member: 3440"><p>Also a non-lawyer - but someone who's been party to civil lawsuits that have moved through the courts. I think both of the above sentiments can be true here.</p><p></p><p>This ruling was but one link in the chain. A motion for dismissal is one of the first things in the process that is always thrown against the wall to see if it will stick. It was FSU's way of saying, "Here are our arguments in brief as to why the ACC's arguments are invalid, and don't deserve to even be heard." And by the same token, it was the ACC's way of arguing the counterpoint. The judge's ruling today legally means simply that he sees the ACC's arguments writ large (excluding 1 of 6 counts) as substantial enough to go to trial, and be argued more fully. </p><p></p><p>By the same token (lots of tokens floating around here), the judge did seem to indicate some of what he was thinking in his ruling. As [USER=1199]@orientalnc[/USER] said, one can read the room and determine his ruling indicates the direction he's leaning WRT the claim that the Grant of Rights is invalid and/or even challengeable. </p><p></p><p>But leaning does not equal ruling. These claims are still up for debate in trial, and FSU still has the opportunity to make that case. </p><p></p><p>Ultimately, this ruling simply means 5 out of 6 ACC claims in the lawsuit can go forward, and they can do so in a NC court. The next question is whether the FL court will defer to the NC court proceedings, or if we'll see 2 trials proceeding at the same time. And all of that happens long before any of this is argued in court, should that day even come to pass (it's my thought that it will, as the ACC rightfully understands that it's now in a fight for its own survival, and the Grant of Rights is the levee that's currently holding back the flood).</p><p></p><p>Putting myself in the shoes of both parties, I agree that it was a bad day in court for FSU - if only because it means their initial salvo was mostly defeated, and a longer, more protracted war (the trial) moves ahead. FSU's attorneys could think that is an advantage, based on the common practice of proposing a settlement to "avoid costly litigation." But IMO that's a miscalculation, given the stakes for the ACC. I personally think this lawsuit is worth every penny for the ACC in legal costs, for the sake of legally clarifying the strength of the Grant of Rights. So I hope it will continue to litigate it all the way through conclusion - which looks more likely with each of these types of rulings.</p><p></p><p>Again, though, that's just the opinion of one random dude on the internet reading the tea leaves.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ThatGuy, post: 1006389, member: 3440"] Also a non-lawyer - but someone who's been party to civil lawsuits that have moved through the courts. I think both of the above sentiments can be true here. This ruling was but one link in the chain. A motion for dismissal is one of the first things in the process that is always thrown against the wall to see if it will stick. It was FSU's way of saying, "Here are our arguments in brief as to why the ACC's arguments are invalid, and don't deserve to even be heard." And by the same token, it was the ACC's way of arguing the counterpoint. The judge's ruling today legally means simply that he sees the ACC's arguments writ large (excluding 1 of 6 counts) as substantial enough to go to trial, and be argued more fully. By the same token (lots of tokens floating around here), the judge did seem to indicate some of what he was thinking in his ruling. As [USER=1199]@orientalnc[/USER] said, one can read the room and determine his ruling indicates the direction he's leaning WRT the claim that the Grant of Rights is invalid and/or even challengeable. But leaning does not equal ruling. These claims are still up for debate in trial, and FSU still has the opportunity to make that case. Ultimately, this ruling simply means 5 out of 6 ACC claims in the lawsuit can go forward, and they can do so in a NC court. The next question is whether the FL court will defer to the NC court proceedings, or if we'll see 2 trials proceeding at the same time. And all of that happens long before any of this is argued in court, should that day even come to pass (it's my thought that it will, as the ACC rightfully understands that it's now in a fight for its own survival, and the Grant of Rights is the levee that's currently holding back the flood). Putting myself in the shoes of both parties, I agree that it was a bad day in court for FSU - if only because it means their initial salvo was mostly defeated, and a longer, more protracted war (the trial) moves ahead. FSU's attorneys could think that is an advantage, based on the common practice of proposing a settlement to "avoid costly litigation." But IMO that's a miscalculation, given the stakes for the ACC. I personally think this lawsuit is worth every penny for the ACC in legal costs, for the sake of legally clarifying the strength of the Grant of Rights. So I hope it will continue to litigate it all the way through conclusion - which looks more likely with each of these types of rulings. Again, though, that's just the opinion of one random dude on the internet reading the tea leaves. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
The 2014 ACC Football Championship was played in what city?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Conference Realignment
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top