Thomson Reuters News & Insight
Featured Content from WESTLAW
Beginning in June, Thomson Reuters News & Insight content will be available exclusively on WestlawNext®, as part of its Practitioner Insights offering. On June 21, the Thomson Reuters News & Insight website, iPhone® app and newsletters will be discontinued. See Frequently Asked Questions to learn more.

Legal

  •  
  •  

Basketball, stock. REUTERS Marcos Brindicci

Injured student athletes lose bid to revive NCAA suit

6/18/2012 COMMENTS (0)

June 18 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Monday refused to revive an antitrust case brought against the National Collegiate Athletic Association by two former student athletes who lost their scholarships after suffering injuries.

Two former college football players had sued the NCAA in 2010, claiming that they were wrongly denied multiyear scholarships that would have covered the cost of their bachelor's degrees despite their injuries. The suit argued that NCAA rules that cap the length and number of scholarships per team hurt competition in the market for elite athletes.

But the Chicago-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit rejected the antitrust claims, upholding a district court's decision to dismiss the case.

The Indiana district court had deferred to the NCAA, giving the organization wide latitude to implement rules that prevent college sports from becoming too professional. The scholarship caps fell under the association's broad discretion, the lower court ruled.

But the 7th Circuit disagreed with the lower court's logic, refusing to assume that the scholarship rules were valid. Still, the appeals court rejected the claims, finding that the market for bachelor's degrees did not qualify for antitrust protection. Federal antitrust law only applies to commercial transactions, and students can't simply buy a bachelor's degree, the court ruled.

"As many unhappy undergraduates can attest, payment of tuition does not ensure the receipt of a degree," Judge Joel Flaum wrote for a unanimous three-judge panel.

The students could have argued that the NCAA rules limit competition between schools in the market for athletic labor, but they failed to make that allegation in their complaint, the panel ruled.

Steve Berman, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said the ruling opens up the opportunity to file a new lawsuit that focuses on the student-athlete labor market instead of the market for bachelor's degrees. "We know what the 7th Circuit wants, and we think we can easily do that," he said.

Gregory Curtner, a lawyer for the NCAA, was not immediately available for comment.

The case is Agnew v. NCAA, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, No. 11-3066.

For Agnew et al: Steve Berman of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro.

For the NCAA: Gregory Curtner of Schiff Hardin.

(Reporting By Terry Baynes)

Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook 


Register or log in to comment.

© 2013 Thomson Reuters