I would think there is as much of a chance of legal action with Pitt's Chancellor, since he falsely led the conference presidents awry and then promptly defected, as with ESPN/ACC. Would both be named as defendants in a suit?
If you can find proof that Syracuse and Pitt purposely made contract negotiations difficult within the Big East to make it fail and then bolted for the ACC after it, then you have a case against the 2 schools and not the ACC or ESPN for breaking up the Big East and damaging contract negotiations with ESPN. Unless ofcourse you find proof that behind the scenes ESPN has been puppeteering contract negotiation breakdowns between leagues so that it can undermine the NCAA!!! I am not a lawyer but married to one from the Pukon Law school! LMAO