## Facts

- The Big East Conference (Big East) is a not-for-profit athletic conference headquartered in Providence, Rhode Island, that organizes intercollegiate athletics for its member schools and negotiates significant broadcast and marketing arrangements.
- West Virginia University (WVU) is a West Virginia state university that had been a Big East member since 1991.
- As a condition of membership, WVU agreed to comply with the Big East bylaws governing the conference and its members, including provisions addressing a member school’s withdrawal.
- The bylaws required a withdrawing member to give at least 27 months’ written notice of withdrawal effective the following July 1, to pay a withdrawal fee of at least $5 million (with $2.5 million due upon notice), and to continue participating in conference competition until the effective withdrawal date.
- The bylaws contemplated injunctive relief and recovery of attorneys’ fees and costs if a member did not comply with the withdrawal requirements.
- On October 28, 2011, WVU publicly announced its intent to leave the Big East for another athletic conference and sent notice stating it would withdraw effective June 30, 2012, which was shorter than the bylaws’ notice requirement.
- On October 31, 2011, WVU filed suit in a West Virginia circuit court seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and alleging the Big East had breached contractual and fiduciary duties.
- On November 4, 2011, the Big East filed suit in Rhode Island Superior Court seeking specific performance of the withdrawal provisions and injunctive relief preventing WVU from withdrawing without meeting the bylaws’ requirements.
- WVU moved to dismiss the Rhode Island action, arguing (among other grounds) that Rhode Island should yield to the earlier-filed West Virginia case under the first-to-file rule and related doctrines; WVU also challenged personal jurisdiction and service of process and sought dismissal or a stay based on comity and forum non conveniens.

## Issues

1. Whether Rhode Island could exercise personal jurisdiction over WVU based on WVU’s conference-related relationship with the Rhode Island-headquartered Big East and the dispute arising from that relationship.
2. Whether the Big East’s service of process on WVU was sufficient under Rhode Island procedure for an out-of-state public university.
3. Whether the Rhode Island action should be dismissed or stayed in favor of the earlier-filed West Virginia action under the first-to-file rule, comity, or forum non conveniens.

## Decision

- The court denied WVU’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.
- The court denied WVU’s motion to dismiss for insufficient service of process.
- The court denied WVU’s alternative request to dismiss or stay the Rhode Island action based on the earlier-filed West Virginia case, comity, and forum non conveniens.

## Legal Principles

- Rhode Island’s long-arm statute permits personal jurisdiction to the constitutional limit; due process is satisfied when the defendant has sufficient forum-related contacts and exercising jurisdiction is reasonable.
- A defendant that voluntarily enters and maintains an ongoing, structured relationship with a Rhode Island-centered organization—and receives benefits from that relationship—can reasonably anticipate being sued in Rhode Island over disputes tied to that relationship.
- Service of process is sufficient when carried out in a manner authorized by Rhode Island rules and reasonably calculated to give the defendant notice and an opportunity to respond.
- The first-to-file rule, comity, and forum non conveniens are discretionary case-management doctrines; a court may keep a later-filed action when the forum has a strong connection to the dispute and dismissal or a stay would not serve fairness or convenience.
- A plaintiff’s chosen forum and the forum’s interest in resolving disputes connected to a Rhode Island-based entity weigh against deferring to a parallel action in another state.

## Conclusion

The Rhode Island Superior Court allowed the Big East’s enforcement action to proceed against WVU, concluding that WVU’s long-term participation in the Providence-based conference supported personal jurisdiction, service was adequate, and neither the earlier-filed West Virginia case nor discretionary doctrines justified dismissal or a stay of the Rhode Island litigation.


Big East Conference v. West Virginia University, C.A. No. PB 11-6391 (2011)