S.C. judge makes ruling on Clemson's case versus ACC (2024)

PICKENS, South Carolina - A Pickens County Circuit Court judge denied the request of the Atlantic Coast Conference to abate, or stay, Clemson’s lawsuit against the conference in the state of South Carolina.

The league asked judge Perry H. Gravely to abate, or in the words of ACC counsel Jim Cooney, “park to the side” the South Carolina case where Clemson has sued the conference. Gravely said the ACC didn’t provide enough proof that the lawsuit shouldn’t continue in South Carolina but did dismiss a “sovereign immunity” claim by Clemson that the lawsuit should only be heard in South Carolina, meaning the case will continue to be heard in North Carolina.

In North Carolina, Clemson has appealed the decision by Judge Louis Bledsoe that the case should continue in the North Carolina courts. That will now move to the appellate courts, and that was part of Clemson’s argument that no one knows a timeline for that to be heard. Clemson lawyer Rush Smith said, “We don’t know how long justice will be delayed….I mean, denied.”

What does it all mean? This means that the lawsuit and Clemson’s complaint will continue in the normal course of litigation in South Carolina (while Clemson will also look to its appeal in North Carolina).

The ACC released the following statement shortly after the rulings:

“We are pleased with the dismissal of Clemson’s sovereign immunity claim and are disappointed with the other two rulings. The ACC will continue to focus on protecting the best interests of our membership.”

More to come.

"They are asking the court to delay justice." #Clemson is now speaking in rebuttal of the ACC's argument for abatement. https://t.co/ueVVCvcqEN

— TigerNet.com (@ClemsonTigerNet) July 12, 2024

The ACC argues that #Clemson's implication of being "coerced" into signing the contract is misplaced. https://t.co/1q0hZVEU86

See Also

Clemson and the ACC: Addressing the rumors, legal status, and a possible new playerSouth Carolina Gameco*cks vs. Clemson Tigers Live Score and Stats - November 26, 2022 GametrackerImportant dates coming up in Clemson's case versus the ACCWhy an attempt to move Clemson-South Carolina to Black Friday made it into a legal filing

— TigerNet.com (@ClemsonTigerNet) July 12, 2024

#Clemson argues that the ACC performs commercial activities in South Carolina, which they believe strengthens its argument of jurisdiction. https://t.co/z3YaCVbrXS

— TigerNet.com (@ClemsonTigerNet) July 12, 2024

#Clemson references the ESPN agreements, citing the GOR is modified by that specific agreement. The ACC has to fulfill its obligations under the ESPN contract. https://t.co/jf7sOVHNQO

— TigerNet.com (@ClemsonTigerNet) July 12, 2024

"It is simply a closed question about whether there is jurisdiction in South Carolina." #Clemson is on the move within their argument. https://t.co/hTZoSsTnwE

— TigerNet.com (@ClemsonTigerNet) July 12, 2024

"Every time the GOR was presented to #Clemson, the ACC said we need you to sign this, or ESPN won't go for the contract." https://t.co/6r47ZRkA4f

— TigerNet.com (@ClemsonTigerNet) July 12, 2024

Clemson is now speaking. "This is important for the town, the state, and the county for #Clemson to thrive." https://t.co/IlUh8Zgt56

— TigerNet.com (@ClemsonTigerNet) July 12, 2024

The ACC uses President Clement's words in its argument. "The ACC is a great conference. This increases the national exposure for additional revenue and our athletes. It stabilizes the conference long term." https://t.co/BHIT3TgEoX

— TigerNet.com (@ClemsonTigerNet) July 12, 2024

The fundamental question the ACC argues is whether the jurisdiction #Clemson claims to have is irrelevant. https://t.co/O0CtTPi2At

— TigerNet.com (@ClemsonTigerNet) July 12, 2024

Rush Smith says Clemson can't afford to wait for this to play out, saying "as long as this plays out Clemson is prejudiced." He mentions the school can't wait on NC appellate courts.

— David Hood (@MDavidHood) July 12, 2024

Smith says there are no precedents or cases where it says a court should rule a certain way because another court might rule in another way.

— David Hood (@MDavidHood) July 12, 2024

ACC is arguing Res judicata, which is raised when a party thinks that a particular claim was already, or could have been, litigated and therefore, should not be litigated again. They want this judge to "park" this lawsuit until North Carolina's Supreme Court makes a decision on…

— David Hood (@MDavidHood) July 12, 2024

Should be interesting. This is my last photo... Not allowed once the proceedings begin. pic.twitter.com/wF6HH48FqA

— David Hood (@MDavidHood) July 12, 2024