forums

MEGA Conference Realignment and lawsuits Megathread(Its still personal)

Peachycarnahan said:
question: why do you go out of your way to be a ****? everything is an ad hominem with you. are you never wrong? i'm wrong sometimes. the smart people i know are usually gracious when someone knows less than them.

just remember, please don't hate. . . . cocongratulate.
Click to expand...
He is a very angry little man. I wouldn't waste any time attempting to be cordial. It took us years to be coo.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
I congratulate you for being so bad at this.

You want to whine about ad hominem, that's your choice. You continued to double-down on being wrong, so I'm going to call you out. You talk about "being wrong sometimes", but you still haven't admitted you were wrong. You still haven't addressed how you misread what I wrote in the first place (when I was NOT predicting any sort of imminent consolidation of the cases as currently filed).

And, please, don't act like this isn't one of the tools in the argumentative ****nal. You know, to complain about personal attacks when your factual, legal, and/or logical arguments have failed.

You want to settle this? Try explaining your "one sentence blurb" about how the Supreme Court has ORIGINAL JURISDICTION in this matter. I copied and pasted it for you. My head is still spinning on how a person who went to law school can botch such a simple thing as that.

Just admit that you screwed up on this one. If you want to be "smart" and "gracious".

I'm Catholic, I'm quick to forgive. But not if you are going to keep blaming me for your incorrect posting
Click to expand...
i don't think i need to be forgiven, but ymmv. second, i'm not typing all that **** again. i showed my math above. third, as to removing either case to federal court, that ship has sailed. i) under the federal diversity jurisdiction statute 28 u.s.c. 1332, a defendant only has 30 days to remove the matter (there is an exception if you don't know at the beginning of the case that the parties are of two different states but that's not applicable here) ; ii) the statute also contemplates that if the defendant files a motion to dismiss, he likewise waives his right to removal (which happened in both cases); and iii) its not "diversity of jurisdiction" as you wrote above, its "diversity of citizenship" and claimed damages beyond $75,000 to get into federal court (although that's possibly a typo, as we all make them). /fin/
 
Peachycarnahan said:
i don't think i need to be forgiven, but ymmv. second, i'm not typing all that **** again. i showed my math above. third, as to removing either case to federal court, that ship has sailed. i) under the federal diversity jurisdiction statute 28 u.s.c. 1332, a defendant only has 30 days to remove the matter (there is an exception if you don't know at the beginning of the case that the parties are of two different states but that's not applicable here) ; ii) the statute also contemplates that if the defendant files a motion to dismiss, he likewise waives his right to removal (which happened in both cases); and iii) its not "diversity of jurisdiction" as you wrote above, its "diversity of citizenship" and claimed damages beyond $75,000 to get into federal court (although that's possibly a typo, as we all make them). /fin/
Click to expand...


Again, your ignorance shows through.

There are more cases than those involving F$U. There will be even more lawsuits filed.

As I expected, you refused to be "smart" and "gracious" by admitting you were wrong. That's OK, it has been noted.

And you still haven't acknowledged your insane "the Supreme Court has ORIGINAL JURISDICTION" nonsense. You just keep ignoring that one.

Don't fake, admit your mistake.
 
Empirical Cane said:
I think we need a good old fashion woo off.



👆Top 10 TV of all time
Click to expand...

Ric Flair Wrestling GIF by WWE
Excited Ric Flair GIF
Happy Monday Night Raw GIF by WWE
Ric Flair Sport GIF by WWE
Ric Flair Sport GIF by WWE
ric flair GIF
Ric Flair Crying GIF by WWE
 
Peachycarnahan said:
yes i'm a lawyer. i still stand by my analysis and i didn't use the google (nor westlaw, nor gemini) i've been tying cases in florida for for 32 years. i've filed motions to transfer cases (i.e. transferring a lawsuit from one from one court to another court), i've filed motions to consolidate cases (connecting 2 related matters pending before the same judge to be joined together . . . sometimes for discovery and pretrial purposes and sometimes for trial) . sometimes i win, sometimes i lose, and sometimes it rains.

question: why do you go out of your way to be a ****? everything is an ad hominem with you. are you never wrong? i'm wrong sometimes. the smart people i know are usually gracious when someone knows less than them.

just remember, please don't hate. . . . congratulate.
Click to expand...
It can't rain all the time
 
Advertisement
Peachycarnahan said:
i don't think i need to be forgiven, but ymmv. second, i'm not typing all that **** again. i showed my math above. third, as to removing either case to federal court, that ship has sailed. i) under the federal diversity jurisdiction statute 28 u.s.c. 1332, a defendant only has 30 days to remove the matter (there is an exception if you don't know at the beginning of the case that the parties are of two different states but that's not applicable here) ; ii) the statute also contemplates that if the defendant files a motion to dismiss, he likewise waives his right to removal (which happened in both cases); and iii) its not "diversity of jurisdiction" as you wrote above, its "diversity of citizenship" and claimed damages beyond $75,000 to get into federal court (although that's possibly a typo, as we all make them). /fin/
Click to expand...
It's not claimed damages beyond $75,000. It is an amount in controversy beyond $75,000.
 
Peachycarnahan said:
agreed, but i used that shorthand purposefully as a common denominator.
Click to expand...


Sure, sure. It's OK when you nitpick one of my words, but you're never wrong (or won't admit you're wrong).

Are you still working to explain away your "Supreme Court has original jurisdiction" mistake?
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Again, your ignorance shows through.

There are more cases than those involving F$U. There will be even more lawsuits filed.

As I expected, you refused to be "smart" and "gracious" by admitting you were wrong. That's OK, it has been noted.

And you still haven't acknowledged your insane "the Supreme Court has ORIGINAL JURISDICTION" nonsense. You just keep ignoring that one.

Don't fake, admit your mistake.
Click to expand...
you have an absurd sense of entitlement, but you do you. here is your original jurisdiction argument. as you know, the u.s. supreme court acts 99.999% in its appellate capacity of mostly federal circuit court decisions but some state supreme court decisions.

when the u.s. supreme court has original jurisdiction of a matter it means the complaint is filed in the first instance with the supreme court who acts as trial court and appellate court all in one (although I do think they farm out the factual trial issues to the d.c. circuit court for a report and recommendation).

now, importing here my same hypothetical above you have fsu with a final judgment rendered in Florida blessed by the florida supreme court and you have a final judgment in north carolina in the acc's favor. The florida judgment awarded $100 million in damages against the acc. the acc has it banking accounts in north carolina and fsu travels to north carolina to domesticate the judgment. the north carolina courts refuse to do so because they have a conflicting judgment in the acc's favor. fsu is unable to collect on its judgment in north carolina. now suppose there were no acc assets outside of north carolina.

fsu contacts florida's attorney general ashley moody and complains. moody says "hey, north carolina should have followed the first filed doctrine and ceded jurisdiction to our florida court where the first case was filed. that's unfair. I'm going to fix that". S

So moody drafts and files a complaint against north carolina and files it in the u.s. supreme court asking the supreme court to recognize the first filed jurisdiction/venue rule so fsu can get its money. thus, you now have a disputes between 2 states pending in the original jurisdiction of the united states supreme court and TheOriginalCane can go **** himself.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Peachycarnahan said:
you have an absurd sense of entitlement, buy you do you. here is your original jurisdiction argument. as you know, the u.s. supreme court acts 99.999% in its appellate capacity of mostly federal circuit court decisions but some state supreme court decisions.

when the u.s. supreme court has original jurisdiction of a matter it means the complaint is filed in the first instance with the supreme court who acts as trial court and appellate court all in one (although I do think they farm out the factual trial issues to the d.c. circuit court for a report and recommendation).

now, importing here my same hypothetical above you have fsu with a final judgment rendered in Florida blessed by the florida supreme court and you have a final judgment in north carolina in the acc's favor. The florida judgment awarded $100 million in damages against the acc. the acc has it banking accounts in north carolina and fsu travels to north carolina to domesticate the judgment. the north carolina courts refuse to do so because they have a conflicting judgment in the acc's favor. fsu is unable to collect on its judgment in north carolina. now suppose there were no acc assets outside of north carolina.

fsu contacts florida's attorney general ashley moody and complains. moody says "hey, north carolina should have followed the first filed doctrine and ceded jurisdiction to our florida court where the first case was filed. that's unfair. I'm going to fix that". S

So moody drafts and files a complaint against north carolina and files it in the u.s. supreme court asking the supreme court to recognize the first filed jurisdiction/venue rule so fsu can get its money. thus, you now have a disputes between 2 states pending in the original jurisdiction of the united states supreme court and canesforever can go **** himself.
Click to expand...


That is not, and never has been, a "dispute between states". Your original post was talking about an immediate "original jurisdiction" for the Supreme Court, and now you are trying to rehabilitate your misstatements by turning it into a post-judgment "domesticating the judgment" argument. Sorry to say this, it's NOT an ad hominem attack, you are just a liar. That's not name-calling, that's an actual statement of fact. You are lying by claiming that you didn't say what you actually said.

1712454026182.png



You are behaving like a clown.

On top of that, you completely ignore the fact that the F$U lawsuit and the ACC lawsuit involve some different issues. F$U wants OUT of the ACC. They do NOT want monetary damages. They want a declaratory judgment that the various contracts and GORs are unenforceable.

Which, if you were being honest and "smart" and "gracious", you would acknowledge that the two lawsuits are NOT necessarily deciding the same issues between the same parties.

So just stop it with your BULL****. There is not going to be a monetary "judgment" in the Florida case to be "domesticated".

You want to keep bloviating about your hypotheticals, feel free. But that's not what is going on here.

The Florida courts do NOT need to cede jurisdiction to North Carolina courts over an unsanctioned lawsuit initiated by the ACC administrators (since the ACC membership did not actually vote to sue F$U prior to F$U's Board approving a lawsuit against the ACC).
 
Advertisement
Peachycarnahan said:
you have an absurd sense of entitlement, buy you do you. here is your original jurisdiction argument. as you know, the u.s. supreme court acts 99.999% in its appellate capacity of mostly federal circuit court decisions but some state supreme court decisions.

when the u.s. supreme court has original jurisdiction of a matter it means the complaint is filed in the first instance with the supreme court who acts as trial court and appellate court all in one (although I do think they farm out the factual trial issues to the d.c. circuit court for a report and recommendation).

now, importing here my same hypothetical above you have fsu with a final judgment rendered in Florida blessed by the florida supreme court and you have a final judgment in north carolina in the acc's favor. The florida judgment awarded $100 million in damages against the acc. the acc has it banking accounts in north carolina and fsu travels to north carolina to domesticate the judgment. the north carolina courts refuse to do so because they have a conflicting judgment in the acc's favor. fsu is unable to collect on its judgment in north carolina. now suppose there were no acc assets outside of north carolina.

fsu contacts florida's attorney general ashley moody and complains. moody says "hey, north carolina should have followed the first filed doctrine and ceded jurisdiction to our florida court where the first case was filed. that's unfair. I'm going to fix that". S

So moody drafts and files a complaint against north carolina and files it in the u.s. supreme court asking the supreme court to recognize the first filed jurisdiction/venue rule so fsu can get its money. thus, you now have a disputes between 2 states pending in the original jurisdiction of the united states supreme court and canesforever can go **** himself.
Click to expand...
My litigation partners say it's not going to go to federal courts. They say whoever decides first will likely prevail. See what happens.

I think fsu clearly loses. But I'm a transactional guy.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top