forums

A-State to sue Miami if payment not made for cancelled game

Advertisement
Salt said:
like I said earlier, I am not a lawyer. But even if the word was "impractical" instead of "impossible" you would still have a team of lawyers on retainer willing to argue what it means if it benefits their client.
Click to expand...

I know you aren’t a lawyer. That is clear. You not being a lawyer doesn’t mean you are right.


I am happy to report that @Meat has been banned.
 
I'm a lawyer that works in contract law/negotiation/interpretation. Don't have time to read 9 pages of posts, but saw there is a discussion surrounding the force majeure language, which is appropriate. There are other questions such as venue, governing law, etc. I don't envision the University of Miami ever agreeing in a contract to subject itself to Arkansas laws or Arkansas courts. Tell me the University of Miami didn't do that. Someone give me the Cliff's Notes.
 
Poptimus said:
I'm a lawyer that works in contract law/negotiation/interpretation. Don't have time to read 9 pages of posts, but saw there is a discussion surrounding the force majeure language, which is appropriate. There are other questions such as venue, governing law, etc. I don't envision the University of Miami ever agreeing in a contract to subject itself to Arkansas laws or Arkansas courts. Tell me the University of Miami didn't do that. Someone give me the Cliff's Notes.
Click to expand...
This is the Contract

The very final part of the contract regarding Governing Law which states:
Governing Law: This contract shall be governed , construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the state of Florida, regardless of place of execution
Click to expand...
was completely Crossed out by the ArkSt Lawyer pre-signing. but i don't see how that means we'd be subject to arkansas laws and courts...

edit: only their lawyer made changes, and it looks like our lawyer just agreed to all his changes. lol

Link to the Emails that Both schools lawyers sent to eachother.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
calinative umstudent said:
This is the Contract

Link to the Emails that Both schools lawyers sent to eachother.
Click to expand...
A cursory glance at this contract reveals a few things that I'm curious if @TheOriginalCane agrees with. For starters, it's surprisingly barren. Upon clicking the link you provided, I was expecting a 15 page document replete with schedules/exhibits. This contract looks like something I'd expect from a 1L law student. There is no provision on venue, so the argument Arkansas is an improper location for such a suit is now debatable when it should have been clearly stated in the contract, and why in the fvck did we strike out the "Governing Law" section (Section 21)? It's as if whoever negotiated this bent over and took it up the *** for Ark State. Now, I get it. By virtue of the letterhead (Atlantic Coast Conference) and signature blocks, this is a boilerplate agreement that perhaps the ACC requires its schools to use and, let's be honest, who anticipates a football game to end up in a lawsuit? But wtf, this contract is child's play.
 
Poptimus said:
A cursory glance at this contract reveals a few things that I'm curious if @TheOriginalCane agrees with. For starters, it's surprisingly barren. Upon clicking the link you provided, I was expecting a 15 page document replete with schedules/exhibits. This contract looks like something I'd expect from a 1L law student. There is no provision on venue, so the argument Arkansas is an improper location for such a suit is now debatable when it should have been clearly stated in the contract, and why in the fvck did we strike out the "Governing Law" section (Section 21)? It's as if whoever negotiated this bent over and took it up the *** for Ark State. Now, I get it. By virtue of the letterhead (Atlantic Coast Conference) and signature blocks, this is a boilerplate agreement that perhaps the ACC requires its schools to use and, let's be honest, who anticipates a football game to end up in a lawsuit? But wtf, this contract is child's play.
Click to expand...
Well idk how much we pay our lawyers, but i'm sure it too much to lose basic **** like this or to allow us to get ****ed in the *** contractually by a ****** school like this.
 
Poptimus said:
A cursory glance at this contract reveals a few things that I'm curious if @TheOriginalCane agrees with. For starters, it's surprisingly barren. Upon clicking the link you provided, I was expecting a 15 page document replete with schedules/exhibits. This contract looks like something I'd expect from a 1L law student. There is no provision on venue, so the argument Arkansas is an improper location for such a suit is now debatable when it should have been clearly stated in the contract, and why in the fvck did we strike out the "Governing Law" section (Section 21)? It's as if whoever negotiated this bent over and took it up the *** for Ark State. Now, I get it. By virtue of the letterhead (Atlantic Coast Conference) and signature blocks, this is a boilerplate agreement that perhaps the ACC requires its schools to use and, let's be honest, who anticipates a football game to end up in a lawsuit? But wtf, this contract is child's play.
Click to expand...

Do you think it still looks good for us? Do you think the fact that FAU still played there game will effect us? Thanks.
 
OriginalGatorHater said:
Do you think it still looks good for us? Do you think the fact that FAU still played there game will effect us? Thanks.
Click to expand...
I agree with what @TheOriginalCane and some other posters whose replies I read (I admittedly did not read all 9 pages of this thread, so forgive me if I'm repeating anything). There is no breach by UM and thus there are no liquidated damages which Ark St. is entitled to, by virtue of the Force Majeure language in Section 14.

Certainly, a hurricane classifies as an "unforeseen catastrophe or disaster" as noted in Section 14 and I'm confident there is precedent to that effect. The fact FAU chose to play a home game is not dispositive. Their stadium was further away from the cone of uncertainty and, IIRC, was not played at the same time as our game. What is worrisome, however, is you have this case filed in an Arkansas court where the judge(s) is likely to be pro-Arkansas. That's why the lack of a venue provision is perplexing, to say the least. Miami may challenge this and say it belongs in federal court. I don't litigate and thus am not well versed in civil procedure, but this certainly seems to qualify for federal courts based on the parties' locations. Miami may move to dismiss on such grounds IMO.
 
Advertisement
Poptimus said:
I agree with what @TheOriginalCane and some other posters whose replies I read (I admittedly did not read all 9 pages of this thread, so forgive me if I'm repeating anything). There is no breach by UM and thus there are no liquidated damages which Ark St. is entitled to, by virtue of the Force Majeure language in Section 14.

Certainly, a hurricane classifies as an "unforeseen catastrophe or disaster" as noted in Section 14 and I'm confident there is precedent to that effect. The fact FAU chose to play a home game is not dispositive. Their stadium was further away from the cone of uncertainty and, IIRC, was not played at the same time as our game. What is worrisome, however, is you have this case filed in an Arkansas court where the judge(s) is likely to be pro-Arkansas. That's why the lack of a venue provision is perplexing, to say the least. Miami may challenge this and say it belongs in federal court. I don't litigate and thus am not well versed in civil procedure, but this certainly seems to qualify for federal courts based on the parties' locations. Miami may move to dismiss on such grounds IMO.
Click to expand...

Great response. Thanks a lot!
 
If I’m Richt, I’m begging Blake James to move mountains to get this game rescheduled ASAP. I would tell my players to show no mercy, run up the score every chance you get. I wouldn’t even let my punters travel. Go for it on 4th down, and no extra points. Go for 2 every **** time. No pregame or postgame handshakes. No kneeling to run the clock out. And DARE inbred StAte to ***** about it.


But, that’s just me. I want everyone associated with that podunk school dead now.
 
Tony Perps said:
It will 100% be removed to federal court.
Click to expand...

Yep, qualifies based on diversity jurisdiction and the amount in controversy.

Honestly if Arky St uses their 4 person GC office to work this instead of an actual law firm they're going to get nothing
 
Advertisement
Tony Perps said:
I know you aren’t a lawyer. That is clear. You not being a lawyer doesn’t mean you are right.


I am happy to report that @Meat has been banned.
Click to expand...

my claiming not to be a lawyer was not used as any grounds to prove anything. I have an opinion, that's all. And by the same token being a lawyer does not make one's opinion right either. It was **** lawyers who crafted the thing and you have other lawyers disputing its language. So not even lawyers agree which means not all lawyers are right in there opinions either. Which is why I guess we have judges.
 
Us Against The World said:
If I’m Richt, I’m begging Blake James to move mountains to get this game rescheduled ASAP. I would tell my players to show no mercy, run up the score every chance you get. I wouldn’t even let my punters travel. Go for it on 4th down, and no extra points. Go for 2 every **** time. No pregame or postgame handshakes. No kneeling to run the clock out. And DARE inbred StAte to ***** about it.


But, that’s just me. I want everyone associated with that podunk school dead now.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of the scene from Remember the Titans.

“I don't want them to gain another yard! You BLITZ ALL NIGHT!!! If they cross the line of scrimmage, I'll take every last one of you out! You make sure they remember FOREVER the night they played the Titans!!!”
 
TFW you look up Arkansas State's general counsel and see their educational backgrounds.

Good-Fellas-Hilarious.jpg
 
Advertisement
Us Against The World said:
If I’m Richt, I’m begging Blake James to move mountains to get this game rescheduled ASAP. I would tell my players to show no mercy, run up the score every chance you get. I wouldn’t even let my punters travel. Go for it on 4th down, and no extra points. Go for 2 every **** time. No pregame or postgame handshakes. No kneeling to run the clock out. And DARE inbred StAte to ***** about it.


But, that’s just me. I want everyone associated with that podunk school dead now.
Click to expand...


Truth
 
Poptimus said:
A cursory glance at this contract reveals a few things that I'm curious if @TheOriginalCane agrees with. For starters, it's surprisingly barren. Upon clicking the link you provided, I was expecting a 15 page document replete with schedules/exhibits. This contract looks like something I'd expect from a 1L law student. There is no provision on venue, so the argument Arkansas is an improper location for such a suit is now debatable when it should have been clearly stated in the contract, and why in the fvck did we strike out the "Governing Law" section (Section 21)? It's as if whoever negotiated this bent over and took it up the *** for Ark State. Now, I get it. By virtue of the letterhead (Atlantic Coast Conference) and signature blocks, this is a boilerplate agreement that perhaps the ACC requires its schools to use and, let's be honest, who anticipates a football game to end up in a lawsuit? But wtf, this contract is child's play.
Click to expand...



100% agreement.

I don't see why we allow the ACC to retain a dime of our revenue.

Pure legal malpractice. I wouldn't sell my used car to a brother of mine under such a shoddy contract.
 
For those of you outside of the area, I live over 50 miles north of campus and although I didn’t have enough damage to make an insurance claim (and wouldn’t have anyway with the deductible) clean up took me a few days because I wasn’t waiting for FEMA.

I still had a mound of debris (mostly plant matter and God knows what) that I had piled and tied up at the front, that was over 6 feet high. It took at least a week, maybe 2, before it was collected because it would have taken either a huge pickup or a small flatbed to haul it away.

I missed a total of three work days dealing with this. One before in prep, and 2 afterwards cleaning up, if memory serves.

Here’s what it looked like in my backyard, continuously, for hours, pretty much all day, it seemed like:

6D13AFE6-FAD8-4401-9F0F-C5AB86D0D32B.gif


I resent the **** out of these ignorant fools thinking over a hundred people were going to leave their families behind to deal with much worse than what you see above. Much much worse. If you read that current letter they are still bltching about it.

Forget the legalese for a second, just strictly from a moral point of view, they are just dead wrong. It’s a complete failure of institutional ethics because they are simply angry at a missed income opportunity and also feel slighted. It’s truly pathetic.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Back
Top