Connect with us

Florida

3 questions from Florida State, ACC lawsuit court case in Tallahassee

Published

on

3 questions from Florida State, ACC lawsuit court case in Tallahassee


Florida State and the Atlantic Coast Conference returned to a Tallahassee courtroom Wednesday to help answer an obvious but crucial question in their half-a-billion-dollar dueling lawsuits.

How long should those dueling cases keep playing out in both Florida and North Carolina?

The ACC’s argument before Florida’s First District Court of Appeal: FSU’s lawsuit in Leon County should be on hold while the ACC’s lawsuit proceeds in North Carolina. FSU, naturally, disagreed.

The three-judge panel did not issue a ruling during the session, which lasted less than an hour.

Advertisement

There were, however, three interesting broad questions that surfaced.

Does this dispute belong in Florida or North Carolina?

The ACC’s counsel, Alan Lawson, said the choice is clear. The dispute involves a contract from North Carolina with a North Carolina-based organization made up of schools from multiple states who all come to North Carolina for their common enterprise.

“You have to be wearing garnet-and-gold-colored lenses to come up with Tallahassee as the answer for the most natural place for that contract dispute,” Lawson said.

FSU’s outside counsel, Elliot H. Scherker, had another option: sovereign immunity, which gives some legal protections to state entities like FSU. Does it make sense for a court in another state to rule on the sovereign immunity of a Florida entity? The ACC could have sued — and still could sue — FSU in a Florida court.

Who’s the real plaintiff?

Because the plaintiff is the one filing a suit — not being sued — it’s usually the party that was wronged and gets to pick the venue. Both sides claim that role is theirs.

Advertisement

The ACC, Lawson said, is the only party seeking damages in the dispute, which is a point in his conference’s favor. The league has also argued that FSU breached its contracts by preparing to challenge the ACC’s grant of rights and related documents. That would also make the conference a proper plaintiff.

Scherker put it differently. The dispute centers on who owns the broadcast rights to FSU home games if/when the Seminoles leave the ACC. Those broadcast rights, Scherker said, are “quintessentially Florida property” involving a state entity. FSU is trying to stop the ACC from taking and using that property.

“That, to me, is a natural plaintiff if there ever was one,” Scherker said.

What happens if courts in different states make conflicting rulings?

That’s a question that has lingered over previous hearings and was raised multiple times Wednesday. The answers remain unsatisfying.

Florida State’s counsel said he didn’t “have an answer to that speculative possibility” but that precedents allow for it. Courts can consider exceptional circumstances when weighing whether to pause a case. The possibility of differing rulings, Scherker said, “doesn’t trump exceptional circumstances in a given case.”

Advertisement

The answer from the ACC’s attorney was … more litigation. After all the appeals and judgments are issued, Lawson said there will be “additional litigation in which we find out which judgment isn’t worth the paper that it’s written on.”

Stay updated on Tampa Bay’s sports scene

Subscribe to our free Sports Today newsletter

We’ll send you news and analysis on the Bucs, Lightning, Rays and Florida’s college football teams every day.

You’re all signed up!

Want more of our free, weekly newsletters in your inbox? Let’s get started.

Advertisement

Explore all your options

• • •

Sign up for the Sports Today newsletter to get daily updates on the Bucs, Rays, Lightning and college football across Florida.

Never miss out on the latest with your favorite Tampa Bay sports teams. Follow our coverage on Instagram, X and Facebook.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Florida

Macy's is closing 66 stores in 2025, including these in South Florida

Published

on

Macy's is closing 66 stores in 2025, including these in South Florida


Macy’s is moving forward with its planned closures of stores in South Florida and across the country, the company announced Thursday. 

Sixty-six locations were listed to close, most during the first quarter of 2025, though some had already been shut down. 

In South Florida, the closures only affect the furniture stores at the following locations: 

  • 4501 North Federal Highway in Fort Lauderdale
  • 13640 Pines Boulevard in Pembroke Pines
  • 13251 South Dixie Highway in Miami – already closed in 2024

But if you’re a faithful shopper, fear not. The company said these three furniture businesses are relocating to a nearby full-line location.

Additionally, these locations are closing or have already closed in Florida: 

Advertisement
  • 9339 Glades Road in Boca Raton – This furniture store already closed, and will relocate to a nearby full-line location.
  • 801 North Congress Avenue Suite 100 in Boynton Beach at the Boynton Beach Mall
  • 298 Westshore Plaza in Tampa at the WestShore Plaza
  • 820 West Town Parkway in Altamonte Springs 
  • 3501 South Tamiami Trail Suite 600 in Sarasota

For that Altamonte Springs location, a going-out-of-business sale is planned for the first quarter of 2025.

In the announcement, Macy’s said the closures were part of their Bold New Chapter strategy. 

“This plan is designed to return the company to sustainable, profitable sales growth which includes closing approximately 150 underproductive stores over a three-year period while investing in its 350 go-forward Macy’s locations through fiscal 2026,” their news release reads. 

Go here to see the list of all 66 closing Macy’s locations.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Florida

SpaceX readies for next Starlink launch from Florida coast. Here’s when

Published

on

SpaceX readies for next Starlink launch from Florida coast. Here’s when


BREVARD COUNTY, Fla. – SpaceX is readying for its next Starlink mission launch from Florida’s Space Coast on Friday morning.

In a release, the company announced that a Falcon 9 rocket will carry 21 more Starlink satellites into orbit from the Cape Canaveral Space Force Station.

SpaceX officials said that liftoff is targeting 11:21 a.m., though backup opportunities will run until 2:15 p.m.

More opportunities will also be available on Saturday starting at 10 a.m. if needed.

Advertisement

The 45th Weather Squadron forecast shows that the chance of weather interfering with Friday’s launch attempt is less than 5%. However, that risk rises to 20% if pushed to this weekend.

Regardless, SpaceX reports that this is set to be the 25th flight for the first-stage booster used in this mission, which has previously been used to launch CRS-22, CRS-25, Crew-3, Crew-4, TelkomSat-113BT, Turksat-5B, Koreasat-6A, Eutelsat HOTBIRD-F2, Galileo L13, mPOWER-A, PSN MFS, and 13 other Starlink missions.

News 6 will stream the launch live at the top of this story when it happens.

Copyright 2025 by WKMG ClickOrlando – All rights reserved.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Florida

Lawsuit seeks to push DeSantis to call special elections for Florida Legislature seats

Published

on

Lawsuit seeks to push DeSantis to call special elections for Florida Legislature seats


TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Accusing Gov. Ron DeSantis of violating “his mandatory statutory duty,” the American Civil Liberties Union on Thursday filed a lawsuit asking a judge to order DeSantis to set special elections for two legislative seats that opened as part of a political shakeup after President-elect Donald Trump’s win in November.

Former Rep. Joel Rudman, R-Navarre, stepped down from the state House District 3 seat last week, and state Sen. Randy Fine, R-Brevard County, will exit his Senate District 19 seat on March 31 as they run in special elections for congressional seats.

The lawsuit filed in Leon County circuit court Thursday argued that DeSantis not setting special elections for the legislative seats will leave voters in Rudman’s district without representation “for the entirety of the 2025 session” and voters in Fine’s district without representation for about half of the 60-day legislative session, which begins March 4.

Voters “have a clear legal right to have the governor fix the date of a special election for each vacancy,” and the governor “has a clear legal duty to fix the dates of the special elections,” attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Florida wrote in the lawsuit.

Advertisement

Plaintiffs in the case are Christina Forrest, a voter in House District 3, and Janet Laimont, a voter in Senate District 19.

“When a vacancy arises in legislative office, the people have the right to fill that vacancy in a special election,” the lawsuit said, pointing to a Florida law. “The reason is obvious: No Floridian should be deprived of representation because of the death, resignation, or removal of their representatives. But left to his own devices, the governor would deprive the residents of SD 19 and HD 3 of their constitutionally protected voice in the Capitol.”

The lawsuit said DeSantis “clear legal duty is ministerial and nondiscretionary in nature.” It seeks what is known as a “writ of mandamus” ordering DeSantis to set the special election dates.

“Each resident of the state has the right to be represented by one senator and one representative. These legislators are their voice in the halls of the Capitol,” the ACLU lawyers wrote. “The vacancies in these districts arose over 40 days ago. No other governor in living memory has waited this long to schedule a special election.”

Mark Ard, a spokesman for the Florida Department of State, said in an email that the agency “continues to work with the supervisors of elections to identify suitable dates for special elections” in the legislative districts.

Advertisement

“The election dates will be announced soon,” Ard wrote.

Fine and Rudman announced their plans to run for Congress in late November, as Trump began to fill out his administration.

Rudman is seeking to replace former U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz, who resigned in Congressional District 1 after being tapped by Trump to serve as U.S. attorney general. Gaetz later withdrew his name from consideration for attorney general amid intense scrutiny related to a congressional ethics report.

Fine is running to replace U.S. Rep. Mike Waltz, who will serve as Trump’s national security adviser. Waltz will step down in Congressional District 6 on Jan. 20, the day Trump is sworn into office.

DeSantis quickly ordered special elections to fill the vacancies created by Gaetz and Waltz, the lawsuit noted. Special primary elections for the congressional seats will be held on Jan. 28, and special general elections will take place on April 1.

Advertisement

Rudman’s former state House district is made up of parts of Okaloosa and Santa Rosa counties, while Fine’s Senate district consists of part of Brevard County. DeSantis’ delay in setting special election dates in the districts also has drawn attention because they are in areas dominated by Republicans.

Previous governors’ “routine practice” was to “quickly call a special election for the resigning legislator’s seat and hold it concurrently with the special election for the higher office,” the lawsuit said, referring to the congressional seats as being the higher office.

In the two decades before DeSantis took office, 15 legislative vacancies occurred because a state lawmaker resigned to run for another office, according to the lawsuit. DeSantis’ predecessors set special elections to fill the resigning legislators’ seats on the same dates as the elections in which the legislators resigned to run, or earlier.

“But lately, Governor DeSantis has more often chosen to deviate from Florida’s longstanding practice of timely special elections, in violation of his mandatory statutory duty,” the lawsuit said.

As an example, the ACLU lawyers pointed to DeSantis’ drawn-out response to the 2021 death of U.S. Rep. Alcee Hastings, a Broward County Democrat.

Advertisement

DeSantis “failed to call a special election for 30 days — longer than any Florida governor had ever taken to call a special election in at least the prior 22 years, and possibly ever in the history of the state” to fill Hastings’ seat, the lawsuit argued.

DeSantis ultimately ordered a special election to fill Hastings’ seat — more than nine months after the congressman died.

DeSantis in 2021 also waited more than 90 days to order special elections to fill three seats vacated by legislators who sought to replace Hastings.

“The governor did not call special elections until he was forced to — after residents of the districts petitioned this court for mandamus relief,” Thursday’s lawsuit said. “Following months of inaction, the governor called elections within days of this court ordering him to show cause why the writ should not issue.”

In 2023, DeSantis waited 38 days to set a special election for a legislative vacancy.

Advertisement

“Yet again, the governor did not call the election until he was forced to — after this court ordered the governor to show cause why mandamus should not issue in a lawsuit brought by a district resident,” the ACLU’s lawyers wrote.

Get today’s headlines in minutes with Your Florida Daily:



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending