The stalemate between the ACC and the two schools challenging its entitlement continued Wednesday when a North Carolina judge denied Clemson's motion to dismiss the ACC's countersuit, meaning the two sides will proceed to trial in two separate jurisdictions.
Judge Louis Bledsoe, who is also overseeing the ACC's lawsuit against Florida State, ruled that the ACC had jurisdiction to bring its suit in a Mecklenburg County court. Clemson had sought to have the suit stayed or dismissed based on a claim of sovereign immunity.
“The only court that has jurisdiction over FSU, Clemson and the ACC — and therefore the only court that can ensure a consistent and uniform interpretation of the Grant Agreements and the ACC Constitution and Bylaws, the determinations at the heart of the Pending Actions — is a court in North Carolina,” Bledsoe wrote in his decision.
Florida State made the same claim as Clemson in March, and Bledsoe also denied the Seminoles’ motion. The main difference in the two cases is that the ACC filed its lawsuit against FSU before the Seminoles filed theirs in Florida, while Clemson was the first to go to court in its attempt to overturn the league’s grant of rights.
“We are pleased with today's ruling, as it confirms that only a North Carolina court can issue a decision that applies to both Clemson and Florida State. The opinion also reinforces what the ACC has clearly articulated from day one: North Carolina courts are the proper venue to enforce and interpret ACC agreements,” the ACC said in a statement.
“As the court determined, Clemson does not dispute whether the ACC Rights Grant is valid or enforceable. This recognizes the ACC's consistent position that the 2013 and 2016 Rights Grants are valid and enforceable agreements that each of our members agreed to voluntarily, with full knowledge of their terms.”
The latest ruling means the four cases will be heard in three different jurisdictions: Florida State v. the ACC in Leon County, Florida, and Clemson v. the ACC in Pickens County, South Carolina (both aimed at testing the league’s ability to enforce its franchise), and the ACC’s lawsuits against Florida State and Clemson, both in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, which aim to defend its franchise.
In his ruling, Bledsoe suggested that a consolidation of the four lawsuits tried in North Carolina would be the most logical step to provide a binding resolution.
Clemson has repeatedly said that its lawsuit is not an explicit move to leave the ACC, but rather to determine the cost of such a decision. The league’s rights grant apparently requires any school that leaves the conference to give up its broadcast rights to home games through 2036, as well as pay an exit fee equal to three times annual revenue. Florida State representatives have suggested this could amount to as much as $700 million. Clemson argues in its lawsuit that, among other things, the rights grant no longer applies once the school decides to leave the conference.
Bledsoe ruled in favor of Clemson on several minor issues, dismissing the ACC's claims that Clemson breached its fiduciary duties and acted in bad faith by filing its own lawsuits.
Clemson and the ACC are due in Pickens County court on Friday for another hearing.
