- Oct 18, 2007
If that's the case, it makes it between the Presidents or Chancellors of the universities and the state. They can't sue the ACC to get out of the deal because the ACC did nothing wrong; the error was 100% on the VA side. There is no reasonable argument that the state didn't know what happened when it happened. They did and chose to do nothing to correct it for a period of years while knowingly reaping the benefits. The problem isn't who has standing to sue the ACC but the basis for the suit. What did the ACC do wrong that would make them a defendant in a lawsuit filed by the state or the schools? (If the legislature is contending that they control the schools and only they can authorize entry into an agreement, then any distinction between the state and the schools is erased on the matter; the schools are just a subgroup of the state.) From an ACC perspective, the foundation is anything but weak - they offered a deal and lived by it. The failure isn't the ACCs to pay for, and internal failures by the state of VA don't create an escape route for them without major adverse consequences in trying to escape a deal they no longer like.I think I see where you are going but the biggest question to me beyond the two I posed is who has standing to sue. Regardless, I think it is pretty clear the legislature is the only party with the ability to agree on behalf of the VA schools and they didn't. The PA legislature would likely have a claim as well as NC. Like it said, the foundation is pretty weak. The question becomes, who has standing.