Reply to College Football--Big Ten Expansion

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "College Football--Big Ten Expansion"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous](OP again)

I am responding to the discussion regarding states sovereign immunity because it isan issue that may be raised if FSU decides to leave the ACC and cannot work out a satisfactory settlement with the ACC and ESPN and other relevant parties who have an interest in the matter.

Again, please read:

https://naag.org/attorney-general-journal/state-sovereign-immunity/

As I have written above, the state may waive its sovereign immunity in various ways such as failure to raise this affirmative defense, by legislation, by agreement stipulated in a contract, etc.[/quote]

Read P[i]an-Am Tobacco Corp. v. Department of Corrections[/i], 471 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1984). There, the Supreme Court unequivocally held that state sovereign immunity does not apply in breach of contract actions, stating, “where the legislature has, by general law, authorized entities of the state to enter into contract or to undertake those activities which, as a matter of practicality, require entering into contract, the legislature has clearly intended that such contracts be valid and binding on both parties.” The court reasoned that to hold otherwise would render legislative authorization for such contracting void and meaningless. The [i]Pan-Am Tobacco[/i] rule has been reaffirmed and applied dozens of times since 1984, most recently by the Florida Supreme Court in [i]American Home Assurance Co. v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.[/i], 908 So. 2d 459, 462 (Fla. 2005).[/quote]

Did this US Supreme Court case abolish sovereign immunity for states ?[/quote]

That is from the Florida Supreme Court saying that the Florida legislature waived sovereign immunity for breach of contract actions --- all breach of contract actions based on written contracts.  The same result is in every State in the Union.  You do not get to contract with a State or a State entity and then claim immunity in a breach of contract suit.

[b]This is Florida saying that the thing you are saying does not exist.
[/b]
[/quote]

That is absolutely incorrect. The Supreme Court of Florida is NOT denying the existence of state sovereign immunity. If you think that it is, then I encourage you to do further research as it does not. Facts matter. Each case has its own facts. I have not read this case, but nothing that you have shared in this thread indicates that the Supreme Court of Florida denies the existence of state sovereign immunity.

This is the Florida Supreme Court. What is the legislation ?

Things get tricky & complicated because facts are different in each case.[/quote]

NO!  The Florida Supreme Court says that there is a waiver for any written contract the State or a State agancy enters into.  [b]Full Stop.[/b]  yes there is Soveriegn Immunity but it has been waived whenever the State enters into a contract.

[/quote]

Sorry, but you lose credibility when you use slang terms like "Full Stop".

Facts matter.

It would take many hours, probably days, to read everything involved in the FSU/ACC/ESPM matter regarding GOR.

[b]Plus, does the contract specify that a particular state's laws apply to any dispute arising under this contract ?
[/b]
FSU has many lines of legal challenges regarding the contract between FSU and ACC/ESPN. We do not know all of the facts.

Few things in law can be stated with certainty, but state sovereign immunity is about as close as we can come to stating with certainty that it exists unless waived in circumstances that apply to a specific case issue.

Litigation costs could certainly run into the millions of dollars, maybe tens of millions in the FSU v. ACC/ESPN matter.

In a Florida Court of Appeals case cited above that reversed the trial court and therefore the Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the university, FIU, the state court of appeals did not know the answer so it certified a question to the state of Florida Supreme Court.

State Sovereign Immunity exists unless waived. Whether or not a particular waiver applies to a specific case issue is another matter.[/quote]

Now you are backtracking.  This is Florida law which applies to any Soverign Immunity claim for FSU.  You can't claim Soverign Immunity outside of your state.  So if the suit was in North Carolina --- Soverign Immunity of Florida is largely not relevant and cannot be claimed.  Only in Florida is it even relevant.[/quote]

This is not accurate. You need the facts of a specific case. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics