Lawyer here: I’ve read the FSU and Clemson complaints.
FSU’s complaint was crap and a fair judge would reject their case. Florida courts might rule in FSU’s favor anyway, but keep in mind ACC filed a case first against FSU on ACC’s home turf. If FSU wins in Florida but loses in case on ACC’s turf it probably doesn’t get FSU the legal clarity they need to join another conference.
Clemson’s complaint is pretty good and I think their case has a legit shot in any court. The issues are the same for both FSU and Clemson; but Clemson’s lawyers, unlike FSU’s lawyers, are good. Crucially, Clemson’s lawyers build an argument for why the grant of rights does not extend past the end of their conference membership based on the actual TEXT of the relevant contracts, which is by FAR the most important factor in any breach of contract case. Maybe FSU made the same or similar argument, but I don‘t think they did, and if they did it wasn’t clear, which is pretty much the same as not making the argument at all. Also, Clemson’s lawyers have successfully kept Clemson administrators from running their mouths stupidly outside court, unlike FSU trustees and others. That’s also helped Clemson’s case. Clemson looks like the victim here, not the villain.
Read Clemson’s complaint for yourself.
FSU’s complaint was crap and a fair judge would reject their case. Florida courts might rule in FSU’s favor anyway, but keep in mind ACC filed a case first against FSU on ACC’s home turf. If FSU wins in Florida but loses in case on ACC’s turf it probably doesn’t get FSU the legal clarity they need to join another conference.
Clemson’s complaint is pretty good and I think their case has a legit shot in any court. The issues are the same for both FSU and Clemson; but Clemson’s lawyers, unlike FSU’s lawyers, are good. Crucially, Clemson’s lawyers build an argument for why the grant of rights does not extend past the end of their conference membership based on the actual TEXT of the relevant contracts, which is by FAR the most important factor in any breach of contract case. Maybe FSU made the same or similar argument, but I don‘t think they did, and if they did it wasn’t clear, which is pretty much the same as not making the argument at all. Also, Clemson’s lawyers have successfully kept Clemson administrators from running their mouths stupidly outside court, unlike FSU trustees and others. That’s also helped Clemson’s case. Clemson looks like the victim here, not the villain.
Read Clemson’s complaint for yourself.