FSU Second Amended Complaint in Leon Co. & Petition for Appeal to NC Supreme Court - ACC FSU Lawsuit

FSU files their second amended complaint in Leon County, Florida. The provide ample rational regarding jurisdiction, the reason for the dismissal. They also add two new counts: one regarding Sovereign Immunity and one regarding the home game media rights after they leave the conference.
Also, the fellas talk about the Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the North Carolina Supreme Court which is a request to review on appeal Judge Bledsoe's ruling.
The ACC FSU war is underway, 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

[@hectorestrada3764]

I’m an FSU fan but I always appreciate understanding my opponents. As a former Intel Officer I want to understand my enemy before I decide what their final disposition needs to be. It’s not the world’s fault that momma didn’t love you, but I will help you find a home.😈

[@Jagwarr]

How did FSU setup a business in North Carolina to waive its sovereign immunity? This does not seem the same as the Troy case. The only argument I see the ACC having is the fact the ACC championship games are played in NC. Other than that, the ACC Network office is in Connecticut with ESPN. FSU's product is its home games which are played in Florida. FSU doesn't care about the ACC championship game rights. The ACC can retain those rights because FSU won't be playing in ACC championship games when they leave the conference.

[@TheBigMountainPodcast]

It will be interesting to see what the NCSC says about the Troy case.

[@thatcollegefootballguy]

It really doesn't matter if we keep climbing hills as long as we don't fall off a cliff. Great show!

[@TheBigMountainPodcast]

Good point.

[@observer466]

Random comments. I missed the video which you referenced, so I have no opinion on it. North Carolina taking case. Pretty funny. Clemson learned from FSU complaint and now FSU learned from Clemson. Of course both sides are doing it for the money. Silly statement. Every state has a long arm statute since a famous 1945 US Supreme Court case specifically upheld them. You are absolutely correct that both states could have jurisdiction simultaneously. While the amended complaint now does make life simpler, FSU could have amended later in the case. The judge did make it easier by forcing it now. It would be very interesting to see what happens if the FL court determines that FSU has sovereign immunity and the NC disagrees. The NC court will have to back off its interpretation of FL law. There really cannot be an argument between states regarding the construction of the law of a state. No foreign jurisdiction (including Federal courts in that state) can disagree with local state courts on the meaning of the law in that particular state. Each state court system is the final authority on the laws in that state. I would expect that FSU can be sued in NC, even if it has sovereign immunity. The sovereign immunity would then be a dispositive defense for FSU in NC courts, but would not preclude litigation. If FSU eventually has sovereign immunity, it does not follow that the law in other states would lead to the same result. I would expect every other league to immediately clarify their agreements that there is a specific waiver of sovereign immunity - if there is any chance of teams trying to get out. Anyone that deals with a state owned entity knows that there are special rules, so no one should be shocked. A ruling of sovereign immunity, unless expressly waived, would not shock anyone.

[@TheBigMountainPodcast]

Wow. What a fantastic rundown. You nailed it. We ALWAYS appreciate Observers46 comments! So thankful you follow us!

[@trick7884]

Two (lengthy) questions for JY, and Steve can get in on the second one if he likes. 1. Regarding your discussion of consideration, with the acc retaining FSU's rights post-withdrawal but still paying out FSU its share: In that hypothetical scenario, what tv network would be airing those FSU games? I ask because the acc stated in court that "espn has no right whatsoever to broadcast th[ose] game[s] once FSU leaves." And we know the GoR says the acc only has the rights "necessary to fulfill the contractual obligations expressly set forth in the espn agreement." Which would imply that a different espn agreement or an agreement with a different network entirely doesn't fall under the scope of the "Rights" the acc retains via the GoR. So if the acc says espn has no right to broadcast them (both FSU and Clemson agree with what the acc claimed in court), and the GoR expressly says the rights can only be used with the espn agreement, how can any network air those games or play the acc for them? If the acc were to sell them back to espn in a new deal or to a new network entirely, that tv deal wouldn't be part of the GoR. To include it in the GoR would require an amendment with unanimously approval. But FSU wouldn't be a member of the acc, and obviously wouldn't agree to sign a new acc GoR, either. How does all of that square with the notion of the acc retaining FSU's rights and continuing to pay FSU the current amount through 2036 (or 2027)? The acc's interpretation doesn't logically make sense to me. 2. The petition for writ of certiorari: You guys only briefly covered it in the show (final 2 minutes). So didn't get a much of your insight into this as some of the other filings. Simply, what is JY's thinking behind betting on it being upheld? I thought FSU's attorneys did a great job picking apart much of Bledsoe's ruling (the issue of standing, the lack of an acc vote, anticipatory filing, application of UUNAA to FSU which wasn't enacted until 15 years after FSU joined the acc, etc.). I'm not predicting or expecting it, but I think there's a realistic shot at something being overturned. Acc was just granted a 20 day extension to respond. Win or lose, it's already successfully stalled out the acc's lawsuit in the NC business court.

[@TheBigMountainPodcast]

These are great questions. The answer to #1 is a bit nuanced. Let’s see if we can have a discussion on this next Wednesday on our live ep. As for #2. JY believes the NCSC will agree with Bledsoe’s decision on SI in the state of NC. Is there a chance it’s overturned? Of course! But JY says no. But at the very least, it has drastically stalled the case in NC. So for FSU, that is a huge win right now.

[@user-ot2in8kc1l]

Your statement that the ACC would pay FSU for the games after they left the conference is incorrect. The ACC constitution clearly states that once a school leaves the conference, that school forfeits future payments or revenue from the ACC. Yes, it does contradict what the ACC attorney said in the Leon County courthouse. But, the whole reason why these suits are going on now, is because the interpretation of the ACC contracts and how the ACC is self-serving and FSU doesn’t want to have to go through all of this again, after the ACC withholds future payments

[@Doc_Boots]

I agree. Why bother fighting in court if you can leave and get paid anyway? Why try to buy back your media rights if you get paid for them regardless? None of that makes sense. The entire reason for this court battle is the fear of not having your media rights and being unable to make money in another conference after leaving

[@TheBigMountainPodcast]

They can get more $ from another conference, that’s why. Genetics hit on this topic at our live show.

[@bobswanger7623]

Great show guys. Sorry if I upset anyone with my comment on the last show.

[@TheBigMountainPodcast]

Nah. Your good. Thx for the support!

[@gustavovz8431]

Hey guys thanks for the show another enlightening and an informative program

[@TheBigMountainPodcast]

You got it. We try and “keep it real”. Even if we miss at times.

[@rx2878]

Granted Rights to Exploit Irrevocably....

[@boweevil8390]

Hey Y’all. Go Clemson.

[@josephwofford5090]

Does sovereign immunity apply in contract cases? Fortunately for all involved, you have precedent in the UMd vs ACC case where sovereign immunity was also claimed.

[@TheBigMountainPodcast]

Check out our new video from today when we sit down with Doug Rohan. We talk about this, and much more, on that episode.

[@user-ot2in8kc1l]

Another great show

[@TheBigMountainPodcast]

Thx!

[@buddybroxton5326]

I believe you misunderstood what she meant in the context of that text. If she was not suing the ACC for money, they are suing to get out of the ACC money is the reason they want out of the ACC. Does that make any sense?

[@trick7884]

Correct JY just had to get the dig in 😆

[@buddybroxton5326]

@@trick7884 I don’t think JY was trying to get a digger though just a misunderstanding

[@Thachadnwf]

Thank you I try to be respectful with i disagree

[@wendykozdras5471]

FSU just needs one win hence multiple arguments or complaints

[@Doc_Boots]

So let’s say FSU leaves and goes to the B1G 10 and let’s say they get a generous full share for this example…… how big of a cut does the ACC take of that if FSU doesn’t own their rights? You mention consideration but that is not defined. If the ACC was only taking a small cut, it would have been financially beneficial to leave now and not buy back those rights after a prolonged court battle. If FSU plays a home game against Ohio State and the ACC gets that money, FOX and B1G get nothing out of it? That just again means that you can’t really change conferences in that situation

[@505premoto]

FSU isn’t going anywhere until they reach a settlement with the ACC and exit the conference.

[@marycrockerrohe2371]

FSU is doing this to not die as a football powerhouse

[@richardbrookins5406]

@@505premoto Thank you Captain Obvious!

[@505premoto]

@@richardbrookins5406 Say what? The OP said “what if FSU doesn’t own their rights “. I noted the impossibility of the question. If you have a problem with that, that’s your problem.

[@shallojalloh]

MacKenzie is a tool.. but I digress. I view u guys allowing MacKenzie on as cout-ordered volunteer work.

[@TheBigMountainPodcast]

Lol. In our opinion, both sides deserve to be heard out. No one is right 100% of the time.

[@shallojalloh]

@@TheBigMountainPodcast | agreed. MacKenzie just has the positions that are wildly opinion based..and not based in any sort of law. He's stance of "FSU signed the contract the contract" as the basis for the legitimacy of the ACC media deal is primitive and disingenuous. It's doesn't take into account of the nuisance of the case.

[@shallojalloh]

The ACC communicated that they will "own" FSUs media rights and sell them on the open market. JY your are naive to think that the ACC will do right about FSUs media right. Remember the ACC sued FSU 1st. What incentive does the ACC have to negotiate in good faith.

[@TheBigMountainPodcast]

They own them for the agreed upon consideration. That’s what’s in the contract. By no means will the ACC just “do right” but they certainly will not keep the money from the media rights that is owed to FSU. The thing is, FSU doesn’t want ACC money, they feel they are worth B1G or SEC money.

[@shallojalloh]

@TheBigMountainPodcast | in thr courtroom in Tallahassee, the ACC lawyers said they will "own" FSUs media rights with the right to sell them on tht open market. That's what they said...not me. So their plan is to keep FSUs rights and sell them to Fox.