(09-26-2013 12:24 PM)bitcruncher Wrote: (09-26-2013 09:28 AM)DeacKillsaDevil Wrote: From a lawyer friend
It appears that there is a substantial amount of case law regarding sovereign immunity for states where they've entered into contracts. They all cut against Maryland and in favor of the ACC - at least as far as North Carolina entering contracts is concerned.
"The State “implicitly consents to be sued for damages on [a] contract in the event it breaches the contract.”"
Smith v. State, 289 N.C. 303, 222 S.E.2d 412 (1976)
The main problem I see with this is the fact that the State of North Carolina isn't in a dispute with the University of Maryland. The ACC has the dispute. Making it a case of the State of North Carolina against the University of Maryland is ludicrous...
When did the ACC become the State of North Carolina?
Why did the ACC become the State of North Carolina?
How did the entire ACC not know the ACC was the State of North Carolina?
Why does the State of North Carolina have so many schools outside its borders?
Inquiring minds want to know...
Sovereign Immunity used to be a bed buddy of mine. To answer your question - NC State and UNC are the State of NC. UM is the State of MD. Period.
These are State controlled actors or pure creatures of the State under Dillion's Rule. Now, when States or their creatures engage in "enterprises" and they buy insurance for their enterprises, they have given up sovereign immunity although they always claim it in any dispute.
In this case the State of Florida, the State of SC, the State of Ga., the State of NC, and the State of Virginia are suing the State of MD to make MD honor it's contract. This is just like any other multi-state compact.
I don't know enough about how the Commonwealth of PA and Massachusetts works to know for sure what the deal is there and that goes to NY and Louisville however a good attorney could probably peg BC, and Pitt as being associated with their states as some point in the past - enough to gum them into the ball. The State of Indiana is not in the mix as I understand how ND is set up.
The southern ACC schools have ALWAYS know the law.
As to the guy at Duke. His comments are not on-point. He likes to read his name in the paper but he's not commenting on the litigation at the bar in NC. The only litigation at the bar in NC is the contract that forms the ACC and formed it back in 1954. The other 14 schools are suing MD to validate that they have to perform under the contract they have signed and reaffirmed for the last 50 + years.
The issue of the exit fee is not even germane at this point in the NC proceedings. The ACC will have withheld $30-$32 million of Maryland's money by June 30 of 2014. All of this has been litigated in the past by other entities that have sovereign immunity - cities, towns, counties, states.
The bottom line remains, Maryland was dumb.
Now, as to the end game. The ACC wining the litigation against MD is not really a concern, however, collecting a judgment is what's up in the air and I'm not sure any mechanism other than the NCAA can be used to collect from Maryland. A lien on the State of Maryland or Byrd Stadium is not going to happen and can't be perfected as understand liens and judgments.