(11-18-2013 08:14 PM)Dasville Wrote: I have not seen one comment from any current AAC school, or MWC school that could have been an AAC school, that disputes the details of Jurich giving notice.
I don't know how to make it any easier for you to understand Dasville. The Big East bylaws clearly stipulated that a withdrawing member a) provide
written notice of its intent to withdraw from the conference and b) specify an effective date of withdrawal. If you don't believe me, you can read it for yourself in the
Big East vs WVU lawsuit (page 23, 11.02 Withdrawal from Membership, article a, subsection i and 11.02, article b).
Had the bylaws just said "notice", then any form of notification would suffice (oral, written, electronic). That isn't what the bylaws; they very clearly state that notification has to be written AND that a date has to be specified. In other words, a verbal declaration that school school x will leave the conference at some future unspecified date does not satisfy the notice requirements specified in the bylaws of the conference. It was classy gesture on Jurich's part to let everyone else in the conference know what UofL's intentions were. But letting everyone know you want to leave and actually filing a legal document with signature and a specified exit date are two completely different things.
(11-18-2013 08:14 PM)Dasville Wrote: He told everyone. Short of holding a press conference, our notice/intentions could not have been more explicit and implied.
Again, a declaration of intent is not equivalent to providing written notice. When a school provides written notice to the conference, it is reclassified as a withdrawal member. Per the Big East bylaws, a withdrawing member gives up its right to vote, participate in conference meetings, hold positions on conference boards, etc. Again, it is right in the legal brief if you want to read it.
If Louisville had given notice in October of 2011, then they would have been classified as a withdrawing member per the Big East bylaws. In other words, they would not have been able to do things like second the motion to admit Temple into the Big East conference in February of 2012 (
link) or been members of the Big East Board of Directors in 2012 (
link).
The fact that UofL didn't provide written notice meant that they still retained all the rights and privileges that a member in good standing was due. In other words, the verbal notification Jurich gave the conference didn't mean anything other than it was a nice gesture to his fellow ADs. Furthermore, if you assertion that Jurich actually voted for the increased fees is correct, then you've pretty much proven that UofL was not considered a withdrawing member and that adequate notice had not been provided (they still had voting writes).
(11-18-2013 08:14 PM)Dasville Wrote: A press conference announcing our exit would have seriously harmed the Big East/AAC.
Press conference still don't satisfy the terms specified in the bylaws. If you read the WVU lawsuit, you'll see that WVU still filed written notice on the same day they held their press conference (you can read
the actual written notice of withdrawal on page 28).