Not so fast, my friend: ACC objects to Clemson speeding up South Carolina court case (2024)

CLEMSON— While Clemson has sought to speed up its case against the Atlantic Coast Conference with a motion for summary judgment, the ACC is pulling a Lee Corso-esque "Not so fast, my friend."

In a filing in Pickens County on June 14, the ACC argued a hearing can't be held on Clemson's latest motion, filed by the school's lawyers on May 30, before arguments are heard on the conference's motion to dismiss filed on May 7.

Clemson and the ACC — at odds over whether the conference irrevocably owns the school's broadcast rights for the entirety of the league's contract with ESPN— are still battling over jurisdiction in their dispute.

A day after Clemson filed its March 19 complaint in South Carolina, the ACC countersued in North Carolina. The university filed a motion to dismiss that case, arguing it has sovereign immunity and can't be brought to court in another state.

A hearing on Clemson’s motion to dismiss the North Carolina case is currently slated for9:30 a.m. on July 2.

The university's lawyers have requested the court in Pickens County hold a hearing on summary judgment on or before July 12, arguing a reading of the ACC's grant of rights and the ESPN contract bears out that the conference can fulfill its obligations in the ESPN contract, which could run until 2036, without holding onto Clemson's rights.

Clemson's lawyers have framed the league's $140 million exit penalty as"unconscionable"and argue, if Clemson left the ACC, the conference should only maintain the rights to games the Tigers played in the ACC.

Conversely, the ACC is arguing the conference owns member institutions' broadcast rights "regardless" of whether they remain a member and Clemson would owe damages if it left the league before 2036.

"The ACC has not found a single published appellate opinion in which a court ruled on a Motion for Summary Judgment before the defendant filed an Answer (to Clemson's complaints)," the ACC's filing on June 14 read. "Nor has the ACC found a single published case in which a trial court decided a Motion for Summary Judgment during the same hearing it addressed a Motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction."

Clemson's attempt to have the court rule on summary judgment before there is a determination on the ACC's motion to dismiss would ask "this court to do something that has never been done (or at least reported)," the ACC's filing said.

"At present, the Court has not yet determined whether it has jurisdiction over the ACC — yet Clemson’s Notice of Hearing requires the ACC to respond to a substantive motion on the merits despite the fact that the ACC contends that this court does not have jurisdiction," the ACC's filing continues. "This places the ACC, and the Court, in an impossible position."