|
Replies: 62
| visibility 14282
|
Webmaster [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
∞
Posts: 45459
Joined: 2012
|
TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
1
Jul 10, 2024, 1:39 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
All-TigerNet [5759]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
2
Jul 10, 2024, 1:40 PM
|
|
Not surprised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3440]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
1
Jul 10, 2024, 1:45 PM
|
|
I know right? I’m just shocked 🙄
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [327]
TigerPulse: 95%
15
|
Yeah not too surprising, but how can a NC court
1
Jul 10, 2024, 2:48 PM
|
|
be unbiased against Clemson? Reality is, there’s no such thing as a “neutral” court. Now I would be super shocked if the Pickens Co. judge sides with the NC judge and ACC against Clemson. I’m excited to see what “procedural chaos” looks like! Get yer popcorn ready!! 🍿😏
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [60773]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 61740
Joined: 2007
|
Re: Yeah not too surprising, but how can a NC court
1
2
Jul 10, 2024, 3:17 PM
|
|
Just maybe the Clemson attorneys should have seen what was coming down the pipe with this court and ask for the hearings to be argued in a neutral court in a neutral state with the preceding's not being held in NC or in SC.
I'm thinking that may have given Clemson a chance for a fair and impartial hearing in a neutral state bc there isn't any doubt that favoritism will come to play a part for the ACC with any hearing in NC that could risk breaking up the ACC that is a money cow for the state of North Carolina... Agree or disagree?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Protector [1485]
TigerPulse: 95%
29
|
Re: Yeah not too surprising, but how can a NC court
1
1
Jul 10, 2024, 3:22 PM
|
|
A fair and impartial hearing would result in Clemson and Florida St. staying in the ACC, or at least having to pay an arm and a leg to leave.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [100286]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 29762
Joined: 2005
|
Do you alternate between posting under tdqtiger and posting under hierster?***
1
1
Jul 10, 2024, 4:15 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [1298]
TigerPulse: 55%
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [313]
TigerPulse: 91%
15
|
Re: Yeah not too surprising, but how can a NC court
Jul 11, 2024, 12:59 PM
[ in reply to Re: Yeah not too surprising, but how can a NC court ] |
|
There's no process to transfer two spending state court actions into a third state's court. It is sometimes possible to "remove" a case from state court to federal court, but that removal is merely from state court in one state to a federal district court in that same state. Federal cases can be transferred to other federal courts, but it has to be another federal court that has its own basis for jurisdiction (e.g. where one of the parties is located). The parties can't simply have a matter sent somewhere just because they want to. You should also understand that courts generally are not going to accept the premise that they are somehow biased.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [1298]
TigerPulse: 55%
27
|
Re: Yeah not too surprising, but how can a NC court
1
Jul 10, 2024, 7:18 PM
[ in reply to Yeah not too surprising, but how can a NC court ] |
|
FYI ACC office is in North Carolina so makes sense lawsuit goes through there. If USC sued to leave SEC is wouldn’t be in South Carolina court
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [9809]
TigerPulse: 100%
44
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
2
Jul 10, 2024, 1:41 PM
|
|
No bueno
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [1298]
TigerPulse: 55%
27
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
Jul 10, 2024, 7:22 PM
|
|
Actually correct since NC is where ACC office is
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5380]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
As I've stated...expected......now we wait for July 12....
3
Jul 10, 2024, 1:42 PM
|
|
Regardless, we are leaving....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22182]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 13231
Joined: 2018
|
Re: As I've stated...expected......now we wait for July 12....
1
2
Jul 10, 2024, 1:45 PM
|
|
Yes, at some point, but it isn't looking like anytime real soon. Getting the ACC to settle is going to be a drawn out process.
And, I don't see much going in our favor in the courts as long as everything being decided is coming out of NC.
Message was edited by: slwcu79®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5380]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
This was totally expected by our side....I dont think this lasts as long...
3
Jul 10, 2024, 1:51 PM
|
|
as you do.
We have the Pickens court and the FLA courts. This will get settled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Protector [1485]
TigerPulse: 95%
29
|
Re: This was totally expected by our side....I dont think this lasts as long...
1
Jul 10, 2024, 2:20 PM
|
|
Sorry to tell you, but the other poster is right. It will last that long.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5380]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
Re: This was totally expected by our side....I dont think this lasts as long...
Jul 10, 2024, 3:14 PM
|
|
LOL....there you are! I remember you previously stated you didn't think we could leave and we would be stuck.
How long TDQ????? 2036?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Protector [1485]
TigerPulse: 95%
29
|
Re: This was totally expected by our side....I dont think this lasts as long...
Jul 10, 2024, 3:25 PM
|
|
I didn't say I changed my belief on the outcome. I just agreed that the other poster that this is going to be a long, drawn out process.
In the end, the GOR is not going anywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5380]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
Re: This was totally expected by our side....I dont think this lasts as long...
Jul 10, 2024, 4:20 PM
|
|
I'm sorry, I thought you had previously stated we couldn't get out of it. No one said GOR is going anywhere....but that a settlement will happen. I understood you saying we were stuck in the ACC (until 2036).
How long you think the process takes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Protector [1485]
TigerPulse: 95%
29
|
Re: This was totally expected by our side....I dont think this lasts as long...
Jul 10, 2024, 5:41 PM
|
|
The ACC isn't going to settle. There is no reason for them to do so.
This will end up in federal court. So far, there are suits in three states. At least one ruling will be different than the other two.
That said, if neither the Big Ten or SEC take Clemson and Florida St., then the process won't even be completed.
If one of the conferences does take Clemson and Florida St., then it won't happen until the GOR is close to running out.
By the way, if you are correct and a settlement is reached, that DOES mean the GOR went away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5380]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
Re: This was totally expected by our side....I dont think this lasts as long...
1
Jul 10, 2024, 7:32 PM
|
|
It doesn't "go away" ...it means it got settled. Clemson just doesn't (and I think rightfully so) believe the GOR applies after they leave ACC.
This isn't going to move to Federal Court.
You really think CLEM admin did all this without having assurances?
These cases always get settled.
Your second to last para confirms what I thought you believed.
We'll see..............
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2488]
TigerPulse: 98%
32
|
Re: This was totally expected by our side....I dont think this lasts as long...
Jul 11, 2024, 9:57 AM
|
|
In the big picture legally, this is a case study in federalism. You could end up with 3 different rulings in 3 different states with the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately taking the case. Long way to go for this outcome, but it is a possibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [1298]
TigerPulse: 55%
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25054]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 18301
Joined: 2000
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
2
Jul 10, 2024, 1:44 PM
|
|
More 'baccy road bs. smh
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [13693]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 13067
Joined: 2001
|
Home cooking!***
4
Jul 10, 2024, 1:48 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Sports Icon [54957]
TigerPulse: 100%
59
Posts: 44107
Joined: 2004
|
Its what the ACC does best.***
3
Jul 10, 2024, 2:09 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2210]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
5
5
Jul 10, 2024, 1:52 PM
|
|
What damages due to breach of GOR? How has Clemson breached it? They haven’t formally declared their exit from the ACC.
Is asking for clarity/interpretation of the agreement considered a breach?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [5098]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
2
Jul 10, 2024, 1:57 PM
|
|
Waste of time and money when you already know the obvious outcome, just like everything else in the country
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [9273]
TigerPulse: 100%
44
Posts: 10832
Joined: 2003
|
As always, lawyers just drawing things out to get
3
Jul 10, 2024, 2:06 PM
|
|
rich. Got their hand in everything. Leaches!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2488]
TigerPulse: 98%
32
|
Re: As always, lawyers just drawing things out to get
Jul 11, 2024, 9:52 AM
|
|
Riiiiiight. The lawyers are the root of the problem here. If everybody just got along and no conflict existed, trial lawyers would need to take up a second job. But alas, people are gonna be people. You should be happy that lawyers can be engaged to work for clients under the rule of law. It is much better than the alternative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [9273]
TigerPulse: 100%
44
Posts: 10832
Joined: 2003
|
Expected. Nothing to see here!***
3
Jul 10, 2024, 2:04 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [199]
TigerPulse: 100%
12
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
9
9
Jul 10, 2024, 2:05 PM
|
|
As a practicing lawyer in N.C., I scanned the Order (don't have time to read in detail). There are several victories in this for Clemson. He dismissed several of the ACC's claims (though most were dismissed without prejudice so they can be brought again). It was a no brainer the judge was never going to stay this. He knows the pressure he is getting in Charlotte to keep the ACC as a relevant entity and a shining star for Charlotte. In truth, this entire fight continues to be Jim Phillips hanging on for dear life to a dying conference. Lord knows what the ACC is paying its attorneys at this point. If any of these university presidents put rationale thought to this, they would realize they are throwing a lot of good money after nothing and would settle this quickly. But, I don't think this will happen soon. Just my two cents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [274]
TigerPulse: 100%
14
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
3
Jul 10, 2024, 2:13 PM
|
|
I'm also an attorney (but not in N.C.). The article, and everyone else on TNet, seem to have overlooked that the order denied (even then, only partially) just one of the Complaint's causes of action that Clemson moved to dismiss. This is not nearly as one-sided as suggested.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [1167]
TigerPulse: 100%
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [199]
TigerPulse: 100%
12
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
Jul 10, 2024, 2:50 PM
|
|
UNC might want out of the ACC too. I think more of his pull is being based in Charlotte.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5380]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [68562]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 90366
Joined: 2001
|
Of course...the judge is a Tar Hole alum***
3
Jul 10, 2024, 2:14 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1800]
TigerPulse: 67%
31
|
Rumors are that UNC want out too, so a UNC-alumnus judge could be good for us.***
1
Jul 10, 2024, 5:34 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [9308]
TigerPulse: 100%
44
|
Bless his heart.***
4
Jul 10, 2024, 2:24 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [13971]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 15036
Joined: 2010
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
4
Jul 10, 2024, 2:31 PM
|
|
How is that possible when CU filed first in SC?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [569]
TigerPulse: 100%
20
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
2
Jul 10, 2024, 3:35 PM
|
|
That's my same question Ggrowl - why does the NC judge get to decide? The Pickens judge wants it in SC right? What makes the Mecklenburg judge more important?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1800]
TigerPulse: 67%
31
|
Neither judge is more important. Both suits can continue in both venues.***
5
5
Jul 10, 2024, 5:35 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [23211]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
|
Does the pope chit in the woods? Of course a NC judge denied it...
2
Jul 10, 2024, 2:42 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [533]
TigerPulse: 98%
19
|
Re: Does the pope chit in the woods? Of course a NC judge denied it...
Jul 11, 2024, 8:39 AM
|
|
I knew I had been saying that quote wrong all these years...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [47998]
TigerPulse: 77%
58
Posts: 35587
Joined: 2003
|
Honestly, Clemson bias aside, this makes sense.***
2
Jul 10, 2024, 4:00 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Cub [13]
TigerPulse: 58%
2
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
1
Jul 10, 2024, 4:11 PM
|
|
Judges have gotten way out of control. The ACC operates in SC so business law would usually mean that they would be sued in SC where Clemson (the plaintiff) is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19495]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 14100
Joined: 2009
|
We really want UNC to jump on board this train now.
2
Jul 10, 2024, 4:26 PM
|
|
Their lawyers are top notch considering how they played the NCAA, and with the venue being in NC we could use some of the home cooking they'd bring to the table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5380]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
Our attorneys are exceptional as well.....
8
8
Jul 10, 2024, 5:13 PM
|
|
None of this was a surprise...in the slightest. We actually got some positive rulings
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [47998]
TigerPulse: 77%
58
Posts: 35587
Joined: 2003
|
We did, but people here are too wrapped up in the conspiracy theories.***
1
1
Jul 10, 2024, 5:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [50823]
TigerPulse: 100%
58
Posts: 14912
Joined: 2012
|
Re: We did, but people here are too wrapped up in the conspiracy theories.***
Jul 11, 2024, 9:24 AM
|
|
All the conspiracy theories have become fact more & more everyday as the CIA’s wording for the media control of the narrative is getting thinner each and everyday.
If that phrase is attached you can almost know it’s true these days 🤣😂
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [11069]
TigerPulse: 100%
45
Posts: 11091
Joined: 2007
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
4
Jul 10, 2024, 4:29 PM
|
|
It's almost like home field advantage means something in court too.
-In the ACC's case
-In Clemson's case
-In FSU's case
-In Democrats' case
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3551]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Que sera, sera***
Jul 10, 2024, 4:36 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3551]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [636]
TigerPulse: 100%
21
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
2
Jul 10, 2024, 4:44 PM
|
|
What else would they say- it's all a waste of time and money! We agreed to this like everyone else, Maryland was the last to leave and they paid up - and have made the revenue back probably 10 times by now on the exit fee.
Next time think before you sign something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Titan [47998]
TigerPulse: 77%
58
Posts: 35587
Joined: 2003
|
Exactly.***
1
Jul 10, 2024, 11:55 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19325]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
5
5
Jul 10, 2024, 4:58 PM
|
|
Got to love the part of the judge's ruling saying the decision doesn't result in a substantial injustice on Clemson.
More times than not a ruling/call/decision concerning Clemson made in the state of North Carolina results in a substantial injustice for Clemson, whether it be from a judge, referee, umpire, league official, etc.
Now, if we can only get UNC to join in suing the ACC, the fun would really begin in the old north state.
Message was edited by: tigerband1®
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7303]
TigerPulse: 96%
42
|
North Carolina is a yankee state that provides nothing of value to SC***
Jul 10, 2024, 6:21 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [1298]
TigerPulse: 55%
27
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
1
Jul 10, 2024, 7:16 PM
|
|
Clemson and FSU signed document. It’s wrong if court lets them leave at smaller penalty before end of contract. Both school should never have signed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [100286]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 29762
Joined: 2005
|
ILuvBrittany = hierster = tdqtiger***
Jul 11, 2024, 1:07 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3551]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Re: TNET: Please stop showing picures of Neff
Jul 10, 2024, 7:18 PM
|
|
Enough Eneff Yeff?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2446]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
What if UNC joins in suing the ACC?
1
Jul 10, 2024, 8:28 PM
|
|
That’s the ticket.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [2060]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Expected
1
Jul 10, 2024, 11:27 PM
|
|
While it would have been a home run if he dismissed acc lawsuit against Clemson, this was expected. I really hope Pickens county upholds the sovereign rights of our state
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [1088]
TigerPulse: 100%
25
|
Re: TNET: NC judge denies Clemson's motion to stay, says case must continue in North Carolina
2
Jul 11, 2024, 12:10 AM
|
|
I think the ruling is fair and the logic is compelling. If we step back and look at the situation, the real culprit in all of this is ESPN. After offering what sounded like a decent contract to the ACC, ESPN then goes and creates a far more lucrative contract with the SEC, thus causing the inequities. ESPN should not have created the inequity and could correct it, but it chose to cause this friction because it wants 2 super-conferences. I prefer the ACC to either B1G or the SEC, and I despise ESPN.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 62
| visibility 14282
|
|
|
50
