For Those Who Want to Take Legal Action..

[Statler]

a must read

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/488/179/case.html

[Stallion]

This is precedent why SMU has no real cause of action against the NCAA

He lost this case in 1988 for many of the reasons I listed in another thread but note, he remained UNLV's coach after a settlement with the NCAA. Tarkanian sued them again in 1992, and the case was settled when he received $2.5 million in 1998

Here's the summary of the Holding

Held: The NCAA's participation in the events that led to Tarkanian's suspension did not constitute "state action" prohibited by the Fourteenth Amendment, and was not performed "under color of " state law within the meaning of § 1983. The NCAA cannot be deemed to be a state actor on the theory that it misused power it possessed by virtue of state law, since UNLV's decision to suspend Tarkanian, while in compliance with the NCAA's rules and recommendations, did not turn the NCAA's conduct into action under color of Nevada law. Although it must be assumed that UNLV, as an NCAA member and a participant in the promulgation of the Association's rules, had some minor impact on the NCAA's policy determinations, the source of the rules adopted by the NCAA is not Nevada, but the collective membership, the vast majority of which was located in other States. Moreover, UNLV's decision to adopt the NCAA's rules did not transform them into state rules, and the NCAA into a state actor, since UNLV retained plenary power to withdraw from the NCAA and to establish its own standards. The NCAA's investigation, enforcement proceedings, and consequent recommendations did not constitute state action on the theory that they resulted from a delegation of power by UNLV, because: UNLV delegated no power to the NCAA to take specific action against any University employee; UNLV and the NCAA acted as adversaries throughout the proceedings; the NCAA enjoyed no governmental powers to facilitate its investigation; and the NCAA did not -- indeed, could not -- directly discipline Tarkanian, but could only threaten additional sanctions against UNLV if the University chose not to suspend its coach. Furthermore, even assuming the truth of Tarkanian's argument that the power of the NCAA is so great that UNLV had no practical alternative but to comply with the Association's demands, it does not follow that the NCAA was therefore acting under color of state law. Pp. 488 U. S. 191-199.

[EastStang]

Let's say, that Larry is right that he made an incorrect statement and went out of the room and came back in and corrected the statement. The investigator who said Larry admitted to lying, himself lied and in fact committed libel against Larry Brown. I doubt that there is any privilege under Texas law for that libel. If that lie was the basis for the 9 game suspension, then Larry suffered damages probably far above that minion's pay grade. My view, this guy was order to stick it to SMU, and twist the facts to fit any violation he could fit it into. If sued personally, he will fold like a cheap suit. The NCAA since it published his lie, is likewise culpable for libel. If he points his fingers at his "bosses" to avoid his own culpability, the NCAA will perhaps be exposed or circle its wagons. Another cause of action is that the NCAA breached its fiduciary duties and contract with us. In the NCAA Constitution 19.1.3 the NCAA agrees that its Infraction Committee to impose an "appropriate sanction". The NCAA rules say that only major violations in the last five years may be considered. Yet the Committee appeared to go back almost 50 years. (19.5.2.3). This is another violation of their own rules. As a result, I believe if the Appeals process doesn't fix this, we may have a suit for breach of contract by the NCAA.
What's funny is that we have NCAA issues after 1985 because we self-report every ticky tack violation we commit. I'd bet SEC schools and Big XII schools don't do that. So, the NCAA then whacks us for all these violations that we self-report while our competitors go about business as usual. We need to appeal, threaten legal action and if we have to be the ones who blow up the fraud that is the NCAA, so be it.

[smusportspage]

Indeed, it is quite the racket that the NCAA has going on isn't?
I am no lawyer but it has been my experience that libel is a hard one to actually win, but it can be done. I think in this case, there actually might be something there. As to breach of fiduciary duties, easier path legally in my opinion. Have to sift through the quagmire that is the NCAA Enforcement and Infraction Committees (plural - two separate committees) first.

[RGV Pony]

Indeed, it is quite the racket that the NCAA has going on isn't?
Libel is a hard one to actually win, but it can be done. I think in this case, there actually might be something there. As to breach of fiduciary duties, easier path legally in my opinion. Have to sift through the quagmire that is the NCAA Infraction's Committee first.

Well Jesse Ventura sued a dead American hero for libel and won

[JasonB]

In addition to all of that, the NCAA was saying that Larry delayed reporting. I believe SMU has said that Larry and Ulrich immediately told whomever brought them information to go talk to SMU compliance. So, both of them actually did what they were supposed to do, and shouldn't be reprimanded by the NCAA.

The admin herself also committed academic fraud at a different learning institution, NOT SMU. If the results of that action were accepted into SMU, it would be a different story. But they were not. That is a legal issue outside of the scope of SMU or the NCAA. And there was no resulting benefit provided to KF, because the completion of the course doesn't mean anything to anyone. From a benefit perspective, she could have asked Keith for his login and password to change his fantasy football lineup. It would have had about the same impact.

The only illegal benefit that actually happened was babysitting.

[RGV Pony]

Actually, babysitting is not necessarily illegal. Or at least it is not anymore, for schools that pay cost of attendance. I guess the issue is probably because it took place before cost of attendance measures went into place. I have no idea what the policy was prior to that.

http://www.ncaa.com/news/ncaa/article/2 ... endance-qa

Q: Do all college athletes receive the same amount of money?

No. Subject to federal guidelines, financial aid officers at each school determine the cost of attendance. Additionally, based on each school’s policies, a student’s cost of attendance can be adjusted based on his or her individual circumstances such as transportation, childcare needs and unusual medical expenses.

[Stallion]

I think the log in and password were for the on-line correspondence course website-that's how I've heard reported that cheaters use these internet courses

[CalallenStang]

I think the log in and password were for the on-line correspondence course website-that's how I've heard reported that cheaters use these internet courses

Correct. The login was for the National University Virtual High School site

[RGV Pony]

I think the log in and password were for the on-line correspondence course website-that's how I've heard reported that cheaters use these internet courses

Correct. The login was for the National University Virtual High School site

I figured it was blackboard or something

[CalallenStang]

Let's say, that Larry is right that he made an incorrect statement and went out of the room and came back in and corrected the statement. The investigator who said Larry admitted to lying, himself lied and in fact committed libel against Larry Brown. I doubt that there is any privilege under Texas law for that libel. If that lie was the basis for the 9 game suspension, then Larry suffered damages probably far above that minion's pay grade. My view, this guy was order to stick it to SMU, and twist the facts to fit any violation he could fit it into. If sued personally, he will fold like a cheap suit. The NCAA since it published his lie, is likewise culpable for libel. If he points his fingers at his "bosses" to avoid his own culpability, the NCAA will perhaps be exposed or circle its wagons. Another cause of action is that the NCAA breached its fiduciary duties and contract with us. In the NCAA Constitution 19.1.3 the NCAA agrees that its Infraction Committee to impose an "appropriate sanction". The NCAA rules say that only major violations in the last five years may be considered. Yet the Committee appeared to go back almost 50 years. (19.5.2.3). This is another violation of their own rules. As a result, I believe if the Appeals process doesn't fix this, we may have a suit for breach of contract by the NCAA.
What's funny is that we have NCAA issues after 1985 because we self-report every ticky tack violation we commit. I'd bet SEC schools and Big XII schools don't do that. So, the NCAA then whacks us for all these violations that we self-report while our competitors go about business as usual. We need to appeal, threaten legal action and if we have to be the ones who blow up the fraud that is the NCAA, so be it.

Larry is on the record calling it a lie himself. No way is there a libel case

[hoopmanx]

If individual boosters want to take action, funnel money into the antitrust lawsuit that was filed last month vs the NCAa. It's like O'bannon on steroids. NCAA said to possibility need to filefor exemption status cause can't win

[smusportspage]

Let's say, that Larry is right that he made an incorrect statement and went out of the room and came back in and corrected the statement. The investigator who said Larry admitted to lying, himself lied and in fact committed libel against Larry Brown. I doubt that there is any privilege under Texas law for that libel. If that lie was the basis for the 9 game suspension, then Larry suffered damages probably far above that minion's pay grade. My view, this guy was order to stick it to SMU, and twist the facts to fit any violation he could fit it into. If sued personally, he will fold like a cheap suit. The NCAA since it published his lie, is likewise culpable for libel. If he points his fingers at his "bosses" to avoid his own culpability, the NCAA will perhaps be exposed or circle its wagons. Another cause of action is that the NCAA breached its fiduciary duties and contract with us. In the NCAA Constitution 19.1.3 the NCAA agrees that its Infraction Committee to impose an "appropriate sanction". The NCAA rules say that only major violations in the last five years may be considered. Yet the Committee appeared to go back almost 50 years. (19.5.2.3). This is another violation of their own rules. As a result, I believe if the Appeals process doesn't fix this, we may have a suit for breach of contract by the NCAA.
What's funny is that we have NCAA issues after 1985 because we self-report every ticky tack violation we commit. I'd bet SEC schools and Big XII schools don't do that. So, the NCAA then whacks us for all these violations that we self-report while our competitors go about business as usual. We need to appeal, threaten legal action and if we have to be the ones who blow up the fraud that is the NCAA, so be it.

Larry is on the record calling it a lie himself. No way is there a libel case

Larry doesn't consider it a lie...not even sure he initially coined it as such, it was probably used by another entity in the discourse of a series of questions and answers. But who knows at this time?

[mrydel]

I think the transcript shows he said it but I have done the same. You say something you wish you had not or did not mean to and you quickly say, oops I lied, I meant to say, yadda, yadda, yadda. But I do believe he did say he lied.

[Topper]

I don't know enough about the facts in this situation, but I was a strong proponent of suing the NCAA when we were given the DP. My theory was that they would back off and agree to a settlement with a much reduced sanction if we started deposing the right people. Just for fun I would have deposed Eric Dickerson who, according to him, told the NCAA that UT tried to buy him with cash but was told by the investigator that UT doesn't cheat.