A group of college athletes will not pursue a lingering class action alleging the NCAA's amateurism rules unlawfully cap benefits for college athletes in violation of federal antitrust law after the Ninth Circuit ruled earlier this year in a related case that the NCAA cannot limit benefits tied to education that schools may offer.
A California federal judge will again tackle on Tuesday the NCAA’s rules capping what players can be paid to play college sports in a long-running case brought by groups of college football and basketball players. The players are seeking to create an open market for schools to compete for the top recruits, giving the trial the potential to completely upend college athletics. Here, Law360 takes a closer look at the case and the arguments for both sides in advance of the bench trial.
The National Collegiate Athletic Association and major college sports conferences said there is no way to make the commissioner of the America East Conference, who made statements suggesting that paying college athletes might not harm smaller schools, sit for a deposition just days ahead of a trial in an antitrust action challenging limits on college athlete benefits.
College athletes challenging the NCAA's amateurism system in a case scheduled for a bench trial next month are seeking to force the commissioner of the America East Conference to testify, pointing out that she has made public statements that allowing the top conferences to pay athletes might actually help competitive balance in college sports.
A class of student-athletes will attempt to upend the NCAA's amateurism system in a bench trial next month, challenging the notion that paying them a share of the millions of dollars college football and basketball generate each year will put a dent in the massive popularity of the sports.
The NCAA recently enacted a set of sweeping reforms that provide modest benefits to the small percentage of student-athletes who pursue a professional basketball career, but experts say the changes do not adequately address the serious issues at the center of a federal corruption probe into college basketball.
A California federal judge on Thursday laid the ground rules for a Sept. 4 bench trial over allegations the NCAA illegally prevents athletes from being paid beyond their scholarships, requiring the parties to cut down over 2,000 exhibits, restricting layman witnesses and setting time limits on arguments.
From questions over athletes' publicity rights as legalized daily fantasy sports and sports betting spread in the U.S. to a long-running multidistrict case over head injuries in the National Hockey League, 2018 is shaping out to be another big year for sports litigation. Here, Law360 takes a look at six cases sports attorneys across the industry are going to want to keep an eye on heading into the second half of this year.
The NCAA must make three witnesses available for pretrial questioning in a lawsuit challenging the organization's rules that prevent athletes from being paid beyond their scholarships, a California federal judge ruled after former college athletes who brought the lawsuit accused the NCAA of playing games with its witness lists.
A California federal judge Thursday said she may allow the NCAA to put on an expert, after all, to rebut a challenge to an association rule capping compensation for college athletes.