NCAA opposes class cert in antitrust suit
Things are heating up between the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and some of its basketball and football players.
March 19, 2013 at 07:43 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Things are heating up between the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and some of its basketball and football players.
The case dates back to 2009, when current and former student athletes filed suit against the NCAA, claiming the association conspired against them in an effort not to pay them for their images and likenesses used in video games. The players asked for class action status, and last week, the NCAA filed court papers opposing certification of the class action.
If the NCAA loses its bid to block the cert, it may be pressured to settle the suit, according to Thomson Reuters.
The players are seeking to certify two classes. First, current NCAA Division I men's basketball and football players who say their images are being used without their permission are seeking injunctive relief. And second, the former student-athletes with the same complaint are asking for monetary damages.
The plaintiffs claim in their suit that the association has created “an illegal horizontal cartel” with member organizations that has “conspired to limit and depress the compensation of former student-athletes for continued use of their images to zero.” They also say that the NCAA has illegally commercially benefited from the use of their images.
In its court filing on Thursday, the NCAA said the individuals involved in the suit have too many differences to be allowed to proceed as a class.
Read about more sports-related litigation on InsideCounsel:
Kosher hot dog maker not entitled to sell at Mets' field on the Sabbath, 2nd Circuit says
Junior Seau's family sues NFL over brain damage
Lance Armstrong doping scandal sparks litigation
NCAA wants Pennsylvania's suit over Sandusky dropped
Sportswear company sues International Cycling Union over Armstrong scandal
Litigation: Is poker gambling? One decision may answer that question
Things are heating up between the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and some of its basketball and football players.
The case dates back to 2009, when current and former student athletes filed suit against the NCAA, claiming the association conspired against them in an effort not to pay them for their images and likenesses used in video games. The players asked for class action status, and last week, the NCAA filed court papers opposing certification of the class action.
If the NCAA loses its bid to block the cert, it may be pressured to settle the suit, according to Thomson Reuters.
The players are seeking to certify two classes. First, current NCAA Division I men's basketball and football players who say their images are being used without their permission are seeking injunctive relief. And second, the former student-athletes with the same complaint are asking for monetary damages.
The plaintiffs claim in their suit that the association has created “an illegal horizontal cartel” with member organizations that has “conspired to limit and depress the compensation of former student-athletes for continued use of their images to zero.” They also say that the NCAA has illegally commercially benefited from the use of their images.
In its court filing on Thursday, the NCAA said the individuals involved in the suit have too many differences to be allowed to proceed as a class.
Read about more sports-related litigation on InsideCounsel:
Kosher hot dog maker not entitled to sell at Mets' field on the Sabbath, 2nd Circuit says
Junior Seau's family sues NFL over brain damage
Lance Armstrong doping scandal sparks litigation
NCAA wants Pennsylvania's suit over Sandusky dropped
Sportswear company sues International Cycling Union over Armstrong scandal
Litigation: Is poker gambling? One decision may answer that question
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Trending Stories
- 1Thursday Newspaper
- 2Public Notices/Calendars
- 3Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-117
- 4Rejuvenation of a Sharp Employer Non-Compete Tool: Delaware Supreme Court Reinvigorates the Employee Choice Doctrine
- 5Mastering Litigation in New York’s Commercial Division Part V, Leave It to the Experts: Expert Discovery in the New York Commercial Division
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
