Clemson’s lawsuit against the ACC had ups and downs this week. The university’s motions to stay and dismiss were rejected by Judge Louis A. Bledsoe III in North Carolina. In contrast, Judge Perry H Gravely dismissed the ACC’s motion to dismiss in South Carolina.
Wednesday’s ruling in North Carolina came after hearing Clemson’s argument to dismiss based on “sovereign Immunity,” which prevents the government from being sued without its consent. Judge Bledsoe wrote that Clemson’s commercial ventures outside government functions waive its sovereign immunity protections, therefore, allowing the case to forward.
However, Clemson will partially get what they want. Although the motion to stay was denied, Clemson has appealed the court’s decision, triggering an “automatic stay.” The lawsuit will not move forward until a decision on the appeal is made.
That gives Clemson’s lawyers time to work on its case in South Carolina. The ACC argued that its business dealings in South Carolina weren’t substantial enough to justify the state’s jurisdiction. Clemson’s lawyer, Rush Smith, hit back, arguing that the ACC’s branding throughout all ACC-sponsored sporting events at Clemson and the league’s alleged coercion for Clemson to sign away its Grant of Rights was more than enough evidence that the ACC has been doing business in the state.
The ACC amended its motion to dismiss, asking to postpone the suit in South Carolina until Clemson’s appeal in North Carolina could be heard. That started a back-and-forth reminiscent of one you’d hear on the playground in elementary school.
Clemson stated that a decision in North Carolina could take a very long time, going as far as the Supreme Court before it’s made. In a desperate attempt to sway the judge, the ACC accused Clemson of only wanting a conflicting ruling to take back to North Carolina. Smith responded saying, “We filed first. If there is a conflict, it is not because we filed our lawsuit.”