Court dismisses charges against CAA

The Student Supreme Court took prompt and decisive action Thursday night, dismissing the case against the Carolina Athletic Association at a pretrial hearing.

Although Presiding Chief Justice Drew Erteschik said all four justices were in unanimous agreement in the decision, he declined to reveal the reasoning for granting the defense’s motion to dismiss. Citing the Student Code, he said the court has until April 1 to release its rationale.

The court will not rehear the case, and there is no appeal process.

Domenick Grasso, a member of Student Congress and the plaintiff in the case, alleged that the CAA violated Title VII of the Code by retaining more than 40 men’s basketball tickets for its members’ use.

Although he said he will accept the court’s ruling, Grasso still believes CAA is in the wrong.

“The CAA consistently and blatantly violated the Code, regardless of whatever the judgment might be by the Student Supreme Court,” he said.

Student Attorney General Carolina Chavez and Steve Russell, a second year law student and CAA member, submitted the motion to dismiss Wednesday night, highlighting several factors they said made Grasso’s case invalid — primarily that his complaint fell outside of the period in which plaintiffs are required to file.

Chavez said she is not surprised by the court’s ruling. “I felt our grounds were valid,” she said.

Russell, on the other hand, said he was not sure what to think the night before the trial.

“I wasn’t really sure what to expect going in, since the (Supreme Court) so rarely operates,” he said.

The last time the court tried a case was in 1999, when students challenged the Board of Elections’ invalidation of graduate student votes in the election of a candidate for Residence Hall Association president. The court ordered a re-election.

Thursday’s hearing lasted nearly two and a half hours, as the justices sifted through each point in the motion for dismissal.

Erteschik said that although the complaint won’t go to trial, the justices fully fleshed out the merits of the case. “I would call that a day in court,” he said.

Aside from the issue of timing, Chavez and Russell’s motion for dismissal included three points.

The first of those noted that Grasso’s request for a temporary restraining order on CAA could not be granted, as the basketball tickets up for debate are no longer available.

The pair also argued that Grasso failed to comply with requirements put forth in the Student Code for the formatting of a complaint.

Thursday evening, a few hours before the hearing began, Grasso attempted to submit an amended complaint to the court, reformatting his original complaint. He was denied.

He also submitted a document to the court outlining his opposition to the motion for dismissal and was given the opportunity to voice his opinion.

In filing his complaint, Grasso wanted to see the case forwarded to the Honor Court to charge members with an Honor Code violation: knowingly violating the Student Code.

But justices agreed with a point made in the motion to dismiss, saying that passing the case along would be beyond the scope of their positions.

Much of the debate related to a Nov. 9, 2004, meeting of Student Congress, at which the body approved CAA’s ticket distribution policy.

The two sides agreed that Student Congress has been aware throughout the year that CAA holds on to 138 tickets.

The court declined Grasso’s motion for a summary judgment in the case, saying it was premature to debate the facts.

Erteschik told each side that the court wanted to make a ruling on the motion to dismiss so all parties involved could use Spring Break to prepare for a trial or to rest easy.

Although the book is closed on the case, Grasso said he will continue to be a harsh critic of any group he thinks isn’t adhering to the Code.

“It was really up to the Student Supreme Court to decide what the intent of the Student Code is — the jurisdiction they have is supreme, and as a member of Student Congress that’s just the way I have to deal with it.”

Contact the University Editor at udesk@unc.edu.