Text Size   Decrease Font SizeIncrease Font Size
int_slide_copy

College Sports Law Blog



Paterno Suit May Move Forward Against the NCAA

Print
Written by Christian Dennie   
Friday, 17 January 2014 15:30

The Court of Common Pleas of Centre County, Pennsylvania entered an order granting preliminary objections set forth by the NCAA and denying others. In pertinent part, the Court ruled that it would be “unjust” to rule on Pennsylvania State University’s (“Penn State”) agreement with the NCAA (i.e., the Consent Decree) and, thus, concluded that any and all claims associated with the Consent Decree were dismissed. The Court also sustained objections to claims for intentional interference with prospective contract, but will allow the Plaintiffs the oppportunity to replead the cause of action. However, the Plaintiffs may move forward on various defamation and civil conspiracy claims.

For any questions, feel free to contact Christian Dennie at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

 

US Supreme Court Will Not Hear the NCAA’s Appeal to Intervene in the Electronic Arts Settlement

Print
Written by Christian Dennie   
Friday, 17 January 2014 15:14

The NCAA recently filed a Motion to Intervene relating to the First Amendment claims addressed in Electronic Arts v. Keller. The NCAA requested the opportunity to be heard on the issues presented to "ensure that [the NCAA's] membership is properly protected” in light of the settlement reached by the Plaintiffs and Electronic Arts. The United States Supreme Court has decided against hearing NCAA’s argument seeking to intervene in the lawsuit. Accordingly, the case will likely soon come to a conclusion.

Read more... [US Supreme Court Will Not Hear the NCAA’s Appeal to Intervene in the Electronic Arts Settlement]
 

Maryland Countersues the Atlantic Coast Conference

Print
Written by Christian Dennie   
Friday, 17 January 2014 15:07

The University of Maryland (“Maryland”) has filed a $157 million countersuit against the Atlantic Coast Conference (“ACC”) in a North Carolina state court. In the lawsuit, for the first time, Maryland is claiming that the ACC attempted to recruit two Big Ten institutions to leave the Big Ten after learning of Maryland’s plans to depart from the ACC. Maryland claims the ACC’s $52.3 million buyout is a penalty to “deny Maryland athletic, academic and financial benefits…expected to [be] derived from joining the Big Ten….” In turn, Maryland claims the exit fee and provision is anticompetitive and, thus, seeks trebled damages under antitrust laws. Maryland seeks damages for more than $16 million that has been withheld by the ACC, $157 million (three times the $52.3 million buyout fee), and punitive damages.

Read more... [Maryland Countersues the Atlantic Coast Conference]
 

The NCAA Committee on Infractions Has Spoken: Southeastern Louisiana University

Print
Written by Christian Dennie   
Friday, 13 December 2013 15:31

The NCAA Committee on Infractions (“Committee”) recently issued its findings and found that Southeastern Louisiana University (“SELU”) committed major violations of NCAA legislation. After the investigation concluded the case was submitted to the Committee through the summary disposition process, which is an alternative to a formal hearing before the Committee that may be utilized when the NCAA enforcement staff, the member institution, and involved individuals agree to the facts of an infractions case and that those facts constitute major violations of NCAA legislation.

Read more... [The NCAA Committee on Infractions Has Spoken: Southeastern Louisiana University]
 

The NCAA Committee on Infractions Has Spoken: Fordham University

Print
Written by Christian Dennie   
Tuesday, 03 December 2013 15:52

The NCAA Committee on Infractions (“Committee”) recently issued its findings and found that Fordham University (“Fordham”) committed major violations of NCAA legislation. After the investigation concluded the case was submitted to the Committee through the summary disposition process, which is an alternative to a formal hearing before the Committee that may be utilized when the NCAA enforcement staff, the member institution, and involved individuals agree to the facts of an infractions case and that those facts constitute major violations of NCAA legislation.

Read more... [The NCAA Committee on Infractions Has Spoken: Fordham University]
 

ACC v. Maryland: North Carolina Court of Appeals Upholds Denial of Motion to Dismiss

Print
Written by Christian Dennie   
Thursday, 21 November 2013 13:57

The University of Maryland (“Maryland”) filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction in the trial court to dismiss the Atlantic Coast Conference’s (“ACC”) claims against it based on a sovereign immunity defense. The trial court denied Maryland’s request and Maryland appealed the matter to the North Carolina Court of Appeals. The North Carolina Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s decision and, thus, the ACC’s claims requiring Maryland to pay a $52 million exit fee will continue.

Read more... [ACC v. Maryland: North Carolina Court of Appeals Upholds Denial of Motion to Dismiss]
 

The NCAA Committee on Infractions Has Spoken: Chadron State College (Division II)

Print
Written by Christian Dennie   
Wednesday, 20 November 2013 15:51

The NCAA Committee on Infractions (“Committee”) recently issued its findings and found that Chadron State College (“CSC”) committed major violations of NCAA legislation. At issue were allegations of lack of institutional control due to athletics funds being held in outside bank accounts and the institution failing to have in place a rules education program, a system of monitoring student-athlete eligibility and methods for ensuring compliance with countable athletically related activity and squad list legislation. The case also involved allegations of rules violations against the former head football coach, including the provision of extra benefits to student-athletes, maintenance of outside bank accounts and unethical conduct by providing false or misleading information during interviews. The Committee ultimately concluded that CSC lacked control over the department of athletics and that the institution and director of athletics failed to monitor the department. The Committee further concluded that the head coach engaged in unethical conduct by knowingly providing impermissible benefits to student-athletes and providing false or misleading information to CSC.

Read more... [The NCAA Committee on Infractions Has Spoken: Chadron State College (Division II)]
 

O’Bannon v. NCAA: Class Granted in Part and Denied in Part

Print
Written by Christian Dennie   
Friday, 15 November 2013 15:46

After much speculation and discussion regarding O’Bannon’s request for class certification, Judge Claudia Wilken has granted the request as it pertains to the injunctive relief class but denied the request as it pertains to the damages class. The injunctive relief class is defined as follows:

Read more... [O’Bannon v. NCAA: Class Granted in Part and Denied in Part]
 

NCAA Files a Motion to Intervene to Seek First Amendment Review by US Supreme Court

Print
Written by Christian Dennie   
Monday, 04 November 2013 17:22

The NCAA has filed a Motion to Intervene relating to the First Amendment claims addressed in Electronic Arts v. Keller.  Being that Electronic Arts and the Keller plaintiffs have settled their claims, the NCAA is seeking the opportunity to be heard by the United States Supreme Court to determine whether First Amendment protection applies to video games. Accordingly, the NCAA has sought to intervene to "ensure that i[the NCAA's] membership is properly protected given the purported settlement between the plaintiffs and Electronic Arts."  Former U.S. Solicitor General Seth P. Waxman has been hired to represent the NCAA.

Read more... [NCAA Files a Motion to Intervene to Seek First Amendment Review by US Supreme Court]
 

O’Bannon v. NCAA: NCAA’s Motion to Dismiss Denied

Print
Written by Christian Dennie   
Monday, 04 November 2013 17:17

In O’Bannon v. NCAA, the NCAA recently filed a motion to dismiss O’Bannon’s claims. The primary issue of consideration was how the Court would treat dicta in Board of Regents v. NCAA. The NCAA correctly relied heavily on Board of Regents and dicta that stated “[i]n order to preserve the character and quality of the [NCAA’s] ‘product,’ athletes must not be paid, must be required to attend class, and the like.” The Court, however, found that Board of Regents “focused on a different set of competitive restraints” and “never even analyzed the NCAA’s ban on student-athlete compensation.” Accordingly, the Court construed Board of Regents narrowly and cited a number of other cases that also provided a narrow application to such language. The Court concluded that Board of Regents “does not stand for the sweeping proposition that student-athletes must be barred, both during their college years and forever thereafter, from receiving any monetary compensation for the commercial use of their names, images, and likenesses.”

Read more... [O’Bannon v. NCAA: NCAA’s Motion to Dismiss Denied]
 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Page 2 of 29

Recent News

Elliott Garsek Named Tarrant County Power Attorney

Elliott Garsek was selected as 2013 Power Attorney by the Fort Worth Business Press. Power Attorneys are selected based upon peer recognition, reputation and professional achievement, including ...

[Read More]

Christian Dennie Speaks at the 2013 NCAA Sports Wagering Conference

On October 8, 2013, Christian Dennie spoke as a panelist at the 2013 NCAA Sports Wagering Conference in Indianapolis, Indiana.  Christian addressed the representation of ...

[Read More]

Recent Publications

Post-Penn State: Protecting Against Sexual Harassment and Misconduct in Athletics, 75 Tex. B.J. 828 (Dec. 2012)

President's Page - Tarrant County Bar Bulletin (July-August 2012)

Conference Realignment: From Backyard Brawls to Cash Cows, 1 Miss. Sports L. Rev.  249 (2012)

[View All Publications]

Contact Us

Barlow Garsek & Simon, LLP
920 Foch Street
Fort Worth, Texas 76107
Phone: 817.731.4500
Fax: 817.731.6200

©2010 - 2013 Barlow Garsek & Simon, LLP
Disclaimer
Law Firm Web Design by The Modern Firm