ADVERTISEMENT

WSU and OSU sue Pac-12

It's a declaratory judgment action. Which means that WSU and OSU are asking the court to enter an order interpreting the bylaws.

What I take from this is that WSU and OSU are taking a relatively low risk approach, which if it goes in our favor, will subsequently be used to say that WSU and OSU are the last members standing. Again, the key decision from the judge will be whether the departing members conduct constitutes constructive notice of withdrawal since it appears no formal notice of withdrawal has been made.
 
It's a declaratory judgment action. Which means that WSU and OSU are asking the court to enter an order interpreting the bylaws.


“Indeed, when (UCLA) and (USC) gave notice of their withdrawal from the Conference in June 2022, the Conference deemed their representatives ineligible to participate on the Board or vote on any Conference matters. The fact that eight more members have now given notice of their withdrawal from the Conference does not change this rule.”

The Pac-12 took the same approach to board membership this summer. After Colorado announced on July 27 that it was leaving for the Big 12, chancellor Phil DiStefano was excluded from subsequent Pac-12 board meetings that occurred before Aug. 4, when five more schools departed, according to the complaint.



These are good facts for WSU and OSU, but not necessarily winning ones. WSU and OSU will make some kind of estoppel argument. Basically that uw, Oregon, and every other school expressly or implicitly agreed that USC, UCLA and CU should be excluded, and now cannot take the opposite position.
 
That’s insane that the commissioner would invite all twelve schools to that meeting considering ten schools have no interest in the future of the PAC12 and are self serving at this point. This tell me more then ever the commissioner needs to be fired and he is out to punish and screw over the two remaining schools even more then they have been. Good for WSU and OSU for initiating this action.
 
It was filed in Whitman County. Which is interesting, for many reasons. One of which is the home town angle. On the other hand, the judge was a small town lawyer for years before taking the bench, and a WSU alum.
 
That’s insane that the commissioner would invite all twelve schools to that meeting considering ten schools have no interest in the future of the PAC12 and are self serving at this point. This tell me more then ever the commissioner needs to be fired and he is out to punish and screw over the two remaining schools even more then they have been. Good for WSU and OSU for initiating this action.
This whole thing keeps smelling worse and worse, collusion with the pac office and the departing schools looks like a real possibility
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeteTheChop
The kid gloves are off and it sounds like Dr. Schultz is done being Mr. Nice Guy and he and the president at Oregon State have instructed their legal teams to do the same:

Per ESPN:

"Unless Defendants are enjoined from holding this meeting, the Pac-12 and the ten departing members will wrongfully seize control of the Conference in violation of the Bylaws and take steps that will cause irreparable harm to WSU and OSU," the filing says. "Once the Conference allows the ten ineligible former Board members to participate on the Board and purport to vote on behalf of the Conference, irreparable damage to Plaintiffs will be done.

"The Conference will have breached its Bylaws; WSU's and OSU's rights as remaining members of the Pac-12 Conference will have been eviscerated; and the ten departing members may seek to amend the Bylaws to alter the governance structure of the Conference and take actions to protect their own self-interests to the detriment of WSU and OSU."

LINK: Oregon State, Washington State file complaint against Pac-12
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikalalas
It makes sense for them to take this route because the 10 other schools could easily band together and basically hijack the conference while doing serious damage to us. These schools that have opted out have no future interest in the Pac-12 and could easily burn it all down on their way out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wazzubrooz
That led Kliavkoff to schedule the meeting himself (for Sept. 13). He invited all 12 board members, including those from USC and UCLA. The Los Angeles schools had been excluded from prior Pac-12 board meetings following their June 2022 decision to join the Big Ten.
Interesting ....

If FUSC/FUCLA has been excluded and no stink was made, the same principle applies to the rest of the traitors.
 
I'll make it easier for those who get blocked on that website requiring sign in credentials:

Washington State, Oregon State take legal action against Pac-12 over control of assets, voting rights​

Jon WilnerSep. 8, 2023 at 11:16 am
The presidents of Washington State and Oregon State are taking the Pac-12 to court in order to gain clarity on voting rights and control of assets as the collapse of a century-old college sports institution veers toward an internecine feud.

The only remaining members of the Pac-12 as of next summer, WSU and OSU filed a joint complaint Friday in Whitman County (Washington) Superior Court that seeks to determine the makeup of the Pac-12 board of directors following the announced departures of 10 schools, according to documents obtained by the Hotline.

The Pac-12 and Commissioner George Kliavkoff are the named defendants.

Washington State’s Kirk Schulz and Oregon State’s Jayathi Murthy are not attempting to punish any of the outgoing schools or prevent them from leaving for the ACC, Big 12 and Big Ten.

Instead, they want declaratory judgment from the court regarding the makeup of the Pac-12’s board of directors, which has voting authority and control of the conference’s finances.

Additionally, the schools are seeking a temporary restraining order to prevent the 10 outgoing members from voting on vital issues until the makeup of the board is determined.

The Cougars and Beavers are considering whether to join the Mountain West or attempt to rebuild the Pac-12. Either way, their futures depend, in part, on access to potentially tens of millions of dollars in Pac-12 assets — assets that are controlled by the board of directors.

The filing comes after a tense two weeks that began when Schulz, chair of the Pac-12 board, declined Kliavkoff’s request to call a board meeting to discuss “complex issues facing the Conference,” according to the complaint.

That led Kliavkoff to schedule the meeting himself (for Sept. 13). He invited all 12 board members, including those from USC and UCLA. The Los Angeles schools had been excluded from prior Pac-12 board meetings following their June 2022 decision to join the Big Ten.

The meeting could include a board vote on the conference’s governing structure and strategy.

Washington State and Oregon State don’t believe the outgoing schools, which will be members of competing leagues starting next summer, have the right to determine the future of the conference and are concerned the Sept. 13 board meeting “may doom the Pac-12’s ability to survive past 2024,” according to the complaint.

The Pac-12 bylaws state that if a school gives notice of withdrawal prior to Aug. 1, 2024, then its “representative to the Pac-12 board of directors shall automatically cease to be a member of the Pac-12 board of directors and shall cease to have the right to vote on any matter.”

What defines a notice of withdrawal?

WSU and OSU believe the public statements by executives from the outgoing schools — and the “welcome” announcements blasted on social media by their new leagues — constitute a legal delivery of notice, thereby rendering their presidents ineligible for the Pac-12 board.

The stakes are high. Major strategic and financial issues require super-majority approval (75 percent). If the court determines the 10 outgoing schools retain board-of-directors status until their departures next summer, they could form a voting bloc that dictates terms to WSU and OSU.

The bylaws indicate that all assets be split among the 12 schools if the conference dissolves.

The temporary restraining order is designed to maintain the status quo (i.e., no votes by the board) until the court determines which schools have voting rights.

WSU and OSU have requested a hearing for Monday and hope a restraining order will be issued before the scheduled board meeting on Wednesday.

Earlier this week, WSU’s Schulz and OSU’s Murthy sent a letter to Kliavkoff and the other 10 presidents expressing concern that:

“ … the recent correspondence from the Commissioner’s office creates the misimpression that representatives of all Conference members are eligible to serve on the Board, participate in Board meetings, and vote on Board matters. That is incorrect.”

It adds:

“Indeed, when (UCLA) and (USC) gave notice of their withdrawal from the Conference in June 2022, the Conference deemed their representatives ineligible to participate on the Board or vote on any Conference matters. The fact that eight more members have now given notice of their withdrawal from the Conference does not change this rule.”

The Pac-12 took the same approach to board membership this summer. After Colorado announced on July 27 that it was leaving for the Big 12, chancellor Phil DiStefano was excluded from subsequent Pac-12 board meetings that occurred before Aug. 4, when five more schools departed, according to the complaint.

In his statement to the court, WSU’s Schulz says the 10 outgoing schools “are now motivated to dissolve the Pac-12 — against which their new conferences will otherwise compete beginning next year — and distribute its assets.”

Additionally, the letter from WSU and OSU to the conference sought confirmation that:

— The Sept. 13 board meeting would be canceled.

— The 10 departing schools have relinquished their voting rights.

— The presidents of WSU and OSU are the “only duly authorized Board members.”

Washington State and Oregon State requested a response to their letter by Friday (today) at 10 a.m.

Soon after the deadline, the legal process began in Whitman County, home to WSU.

Complaints are the legal filings that initiate lawsuits.

This story will be updated.

Jon Wilner: jwilner@bayareanewsgroup.com; on Twitter: @wilnerhotline. Jon Wilner has been covering college sports for decades and is an AP top-25 football and basketball voter as well as a Heisman Trophy voter. He was named Beat Writer of the Year in 2013 by the Football Writers Association of America for his coverage of the Pac-12, won first place for feature writing in 2016 in the Associated Press Sports Editors writing contest and is a five-time APSE honoree.
 
Here is the "rub" with all this.

The courts won't give WSU/OSU authority to materially change the way conference assets earned this year and accrued by the Pac-12 to be materially altered.

I think they are going to have to come up with some sort of settlement agreement.

Likely, all the earned/accrued assets get split up equally. WSU and OSU can "rebuild" the conference. I wouldn't be surprised to see the future NCAA credits/bowl settlement money be distributed to the current 12 member schools.
 
It makes sense for them to take this route because the 10 other schools could easily band together and basically hijack the conference while doing serious damage to us. These schools that have opted out have no future interest in the Pac-12 and could easily burn it all down on their way out.

Good thing Schultz was in charge of this group. If it would have been anyone other than he or OSU, the other schools could have banded together and dissolved the conference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WindyCityCoug
Here is the "rub" with all this.

The courts won't give WSU/OSU authority to materially change the way conference assets earned this year and accrued by the Pac-12 to be materially altered.

I think they are going to have to come up with some sort of settlement agreement.

Likely, all the earned/accrued assets get split up equally. WSU and OSU can "rebuild" the conference. I wouldn't be surprised to see the future NCAA credits/bowl settlement money be distributed to the current 12 member schools.
FSU and CLemson will be rooting for that to happen. If it does, it basically invalidates the grant of rights.

I don't think the court will take this step. The bylaws state that the conference can retain media and sponsorship rights if someone gives notice of departure. The members agreed. The court won't set that aside.
 
I'll make it easier for those who get blocked on that website requiring sign in credentials:

Washington State, Oregon State take legal action against Pac-12 over control of assets, voting rights​

Jon WilnerSep. 8, 2023 at 11:16 am
The presidents of Washington State and Oregon State are taking the Pac-12 to court in order to gain clarity on voting rights and control of assets as the collapse of a century-old college sports institution veers toward an internecine feud.

The only remaining members of the Pac-12 as of next summer, WSU and OSU filed a joint complaint Friday in Whitman County (Washington) Superior Court that seeks to determine the makeup of the Pac-12 board of directors following the announced departures of 10 schools, according to documents obtained by the Hotline.

The Pac-12 and Commissioner George Kliavkoff are the named defendants.

Washington State’s Kirk Schulz and Oregon State’s Jayathi Murthy are not attempting to punish any of the outgoing schools or prevent them from leaving for the ACC, Big 12 and Big Ten.

Instead, they want declaratory judgment from the court regarding the makeup of the Pac-12’s board of directors, which has voting authority and control of the conference’s finances.

Additionally, the schools are seeking a temporary restraining order to prevent the 10 outgoing members from voting on vital issues until the makeup of the board is determined.

The Cougars and Beavers are considering whether to join the Mountain West or attempt to rebuild the Pac-12. Either way, their futures depend, in part, on access to potentially tens of millions of dollars in Pac-12 assets — assets that are controlled by the board of directors.

The filing comes after a tense two weeks that began when Schulz, chair of the Pac-12 board, declined Kliavkoff’s request to call a board meeting to discuss “complex issues facing the Conference,” according to the complaint.

That led Kliavkoff to schedule the meeting himself (for Sept. 13). He invited all 12 board members, including those from USC and UCLA. The Los Angeles schools had been excluded from prior Pac-12 board meetings following their June 2022 decision to join the Big Ten.

The meeting could include a board vote on the conference’s governing structure and strategy.

Washington State and Oregon State don’t believe the outgoing schools, which will be members of competing leagues starting next summer, have the right to determine the future of the conference and are concerned the Sept. 13 board meeting “may doom the Pac-12’s ability to survive past 2024,” according to the complaint.

The Pac-12 bylaws state that if a school gives notice of withdrawal prior to Aug. 1, 2024, then its “representative to the Pac-12 board of directors shall automatically cease to be a member of the Pac-12 board of directors and shall cease to have the right to vote on any matter.”

What defines a notice of withdrawal?

WSU and OSU believe the public statements by executives from the outgoing schools — and the “welcome” announcements blasted on social media by their new leagues — constitute a legal delivery of notice, thereby rendering their presidents ineligible for the Pac-12 board.

The stakes are high. Major strategic and financial issues require super-majority approval (75 percent). If the court determines the 10 outgoing schools retain board-of-directors status until their departures next summer, they could form a voting bloc that dictates terms to WSU and OSU.

The bylaws indicate that all assets be split among the 12 schools if the conference dissolves.

The temporary restraining order is designed to maintain the status quo (i.e., no votes by the board) until the court determines which schools have voting rights.

WSU and OSU have requested a hearing for Monday and hope a restraining order will be issued before the scheduled board meeting on Wednesday.

Earlier this week, WSU’s Schulz and OSU’s Murthy sent a letter to Kliavkoff and the other 10 presidents expressing concern that:

“ … the recent correspondence from the Commissioner’s office creates the misimpression that representatives of all Conference members are eligible to serve on the Board, participate in Board meetings, and vote on Board matters. That is incorrect.”

It adds:

“Indeed, when (UCLA) and (USC) gave notice of their withdrawal from the Conference in June 2022, the Conference deemed their representatives ineligible to participate on the Board or vote on any Conference matters. The fact that eight more members have now given notice of their withdrawal from the Conference does not change this rule.”

The Pac-12 took the same approach to board membership this summer. After Colorado announced on July 27 that it was leaving for the Big 12, chancellor Phil DiStefano was excluded from subsequent Pac-12 board meetings that occurred before Aug. 4, when five more schools departed, according to the complaint.

In his statement to the court, WSU’s Schulz says the 10 outgoing schools “are now motivated to dissolve the Pac-12 — against which their new conferences will otherwise compete beginning next year — and distribute its assets.”

Additionally, the letter from WSU and OSU to the conference sought confirmation that:

— The Sept. 13 board meeting would be canceled.

— The 10 departing schools have relinquished their voting rights.

— The presidents of WSU and OSU are the “only duly authorized Board members.”

Washington State and Oregon State requested a response to their letter by Friday (today) at 10 a.m.

Soon after the deadline, the legal process began in Whitman County, home to WSU.

Complaints are the legal filings that initiate lawsuits.

This story will be updated.

Jon Wilner: jwilner@bayareanewsgroup.com; on Twitter: @wilnerhotline. Jon Wilner has been covering college sports for decades and is an AP top-25 football and basketball voter as well as a Heisman Trophy voter. He was named Beat Writer of the Year in 2013 by the Football Writers Association of America for his coverage of the Pac-12, won first place for feature writing in 2016 in the Associated Press Sports Editors writing contest and is a five-time APSE honoree.
 
And tell me WTF he hasn't been fired already. He is the commissioner of nothing. Don't know what his severance is, but the sooner you get the clock ticking the better. What a disastrous hire

Loyal, the word is that Klaikoff's got 3 years and $10M left on his guaranteed contract.

Believe that John Wilner or John Calzoni wrote about it a while back.
 
Loyal, the word is that Klaikoff's got 3 years and $10M left on his guaranteed contract.

Believe that John Wilner or John Calzoni wrote about it a while back.
Honestly if the stuff in the comlaint is the tip of the ice berg they could probably fire him for cause. What absolute garbage he is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wazzubrooz
And tell me WTF he hasn't been fired already. He is the commissioner of nothing. Don't know what his severance is, but the sooner you get the clock ticking the better. What a disastrous hire
Because some people are way smarter than you. He was named so that the court can enter a TRO, hopefully later a preliminary injunction, directing him not to call a meeting, to exclude the departing schools, etc. Firing him removes him as commissioner, delaying things while some interim person is appointed. George is exactly where we want him.
 
Because some people are way smarter than you. He was named so that the court can enter a TRO, hopefully later a preliminary injunction, directing him not to call a meeting, to exclude the departing schools, etc. Firing him removes him as commissioner, delaying things while some interim person is appointed. George is exactly where we want him.
I have no idea what you just said. Dumb it down for me.
 
Because some people are way smarter than you. He was named so that the court can enter a TRO, hopefully later a preliminary injunction, directing him not to call a meeting, to exclude the departing schools, etc. Firing him removes him as commissioner, delaying things while some interim person is appointed. George is exactly where we want him.
I think his point is since George is being the named party here, the court will tell George how he needs to behave as commissioner. If we fire George, it would just add time to the process.

We want George to be under the order of a Whitman County Judge on how he need to behave. If George doesn't listen, he can spend some time in Whitman County jail with drunk college students.
 
Neither would any liberal POS federal judge out there. Thank goodness Merrick Garland was never confirmed... What clown show he is.
eric cartman kyle GIF by South Park
 
  • Like
Reactions: CastorCanadensi
I think his point is since George is being the named party here, the court will tell George how he needs to behave as commissioner. If we fire George, it would just add time to the process.

We want George to be under the order of a Whitman County Judge on how he need to behave. If George doesn't listen, he can spend some time in Whitman County jail with drunk college students.
"We want George to be under the order of a Whitman County Judge on how he need to behave. If George doesn't listen, he can spend some time in Whitman County jail with drunk college students."

These are probably the most beautiful two sentences I've read on any board anywhere.
 
Clarence Thomas wouldnt
Because Clarence Thomas is a pretty impressive person and has his head on straight about how America was founded/built and how people are the ones to have a reasonable position of power to equal/offset the government.

Give me any judge at anytime who not just knows the law, but also keeps the law vs. "modernizing" to where we get farther away from where we were.

Especially when those on the flip side seem to think chicks with dicks can be in women's locker rooms or saggy breasted drag queens should be teaching in elementary schools.
 
Because Clarence Thomas is a pretty impressive person and has his head on straight about how America was founded/built and how people are the ones to have a reasonable position of power to equal/offset the government.

Give me any judge at anytime who not just knows the law, but also keeps the law vs. "modernizing" to where we get farther away from where we were.

Especially when those on the flip side seem to think chicks with dicks can be in women's locker rooms or saggy breasted drag queens should be teaching in elementary schools.
Jim Jones would like a word with you.
 
Because Clarence Thomas is a pretty impressive person and has his head on straight about how America was founded/built and how people are the ones to have a reasonable position of power to equal/offset the government.

Give me any judge at anytime who not just knows the law, but also keeps the law vs. "modernizing" to where we get farther away from where we were.

Especially when those on the flip side seem to think chicks with dicks can be in women's locker rooms or saggy breasted drag queens should be teaching in elementary schools.
Great lets go back to muskets only then.
 
I think his point is since George is being the named party here, the court will tell George how he needs to behave as commissioner. If we fire George, it would just add time to the process.

We want George to be under the order of a Whitman County Judge on how he need to behave. If George doesn't listen, he can spend some time in Whitman County jail with drunk college students.
Seems kind of harsh to subject the drunk college students to that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: random soul
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT