No products in the cart.
In the wake of O`Bannon, a series of other class-action lawsuits filed by student-athletes against the NCAA and colleges followed, challenging other restrictions on education funding as anti-competitive. These were consolidated into a single lawsuit, which was also heard by Judge Wilken, who ruled against the NCAA in March 2019, requiring the NCAA to allow students to receive additional in-kind scholarships, internships, and other forms of support beyond the full cost of participation for academic purposes.  Some of these benefits include private lessons, selection of advanced courses, and access to exclusive college benefits. The court was concerned that college athletes who benefited from their name and likeness would allow top schools with large fan bases to offer players more money. These in-kind benefits are services that all higher education institutions can offer, making the competitive landscape for talent recruitment fair for all universities.  “We are incredibly grateful to the tens of thousands of college athletes who have patiently waited for the refusenik deadline, and we are thrilled that the settlement funds are being delivered to their rightful place,” said Steve Berman, Managing Partner of Hagens Berman. “We believe this case is a testament to the ability of class actions to deliver concrete results to plaintiffs and leave a lasting impact. SAN FRANCISCO — A long-awaited payment to current and former NCAA Division 1 college athletes has arrived as the sole defendant in a $208 million class action lawsuit that missed the deadline to challenge the case in the Supreme Court, according to the law firm representing the college athlete class, Hagens Berman. In July 2009, Ed O`Bannon, a former UCLA basketball player who was a starter on the national championship team and the most notable player of the 1995 NCAA Tournament, filed a lawsuit against the NCAA and the Collegiate Licensing Company, alleging violations of Sherman antitrust law and actions that deprived him of his right to publicity.  He agreed to be the lead applicant after having his image of the 1995 championship team used without his permission in EA Sports` NCAA Basketball 09 title.   The game featured an uncredited UCLA player playing O`Bannon`s power forward position, while playing his height, weight, bald head, skin tone, No. 31 jersey and left-handed shot.
 In January 2011, Oscar Robertson joined O`Bannon in the class action lawsuit.  Bill Russell is also one of 20 former university athletes who are applicants.  These athletes filed this antitrust class action lawsuit against the NCAA to challenge the federation`s rules limiting compensation for images and likenesses of male soccer and basketball players. In particular, the plaintiffs allege that the NCAA rules and statutes constitute an unreasonable restriction on trade because they prevent FBS football players and Division I basketball players from receiving compensation beyond the value of their sports scholarships for the use of their names, likenesses and likenesses in video games, live match broadcasts. Replays and archive footage of games.  Todd McNair was a former figure at the University of Southern California who, according to the NCAA Violations Committee, was an important link in the Reggie Bush case. McNair received a one-year show cause order that led to his dismissal and apparent ban from playing college football. McNair sued the NCAA for defamation. “It was only under the most intense public and legal pressure that the NCAA established a non-permanent, `interim` House v. NCAA (also known as In Re College Athlete NIL Litigation) before Judge Claudia Wilken, the same judge who presided over O`Bannon and Alston.
Like these two cases, House is an antitrust lawsuit that accuses the NCAA and its member schools, as well as the Power Five conferences, of illegally conspiring through amateur rules to deprive players of economic opportunities. The amended lawsuit was filed on July 26, 2021, and combines Hagens Berman House v. NCAA and an additional case into a consolidated lawsuit titled In re College Athlete NIL Litigation. The filing also adds new admissions from the NCAA and other defendants` representatives that NIL`s approval is good — a sea change from their previous claims that NIL`s approval would ruin college sports. O`Bannon v. NCAA is an antitrust class action lawsuit against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The lawsuit, filed by former UCLA basketball player Ed O`Bannon on behalf of NCAA Division I football and basketball players, challenges the use of images and likeness of their former college athletes for commercial purposes. The lawsuit argues that a former student-athlete should be eligible for financial compensation for the commercial use of his image by the NCAA after graduation.   The NCAA claims that paying its athletes would be a violation of its concept of amateurism in sport.  What is at stake is “billions of dollars in television revenues and licensing fees.”  The plaintiffs have applied for class action status, but this has not yet been granted. If approved, all Division I student-athletes whose records match the claimants` claims and who competed during the four-year period could join the claimants` group.
House is set in an era of transformation for college sports and law. Last year, in Alston v. NCAA, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA was subject to proper antitrust scrutiny. Although Alston was only concerned with education-related costs, which is even more important, the case confirmed that NCAA restrictions on athletes` economic opportunities do not constitute preferential antitrust treatment. Meanwhile, the NCAA has been pushing for a NIL bill that would include an antitrust exemption that dispels lawsuits like House. But the NCAA hasn`t gained traction because Democratic and Republican members are skeptical of an exception. The NCAA is also up against Johnson v. NCAA, which stands in front of the Third Circuit, demanding that college athletes be paid at least as much as students who work to work at the games, and various memos and petitions to the National Labor Relations Board calling for recognition of college athletes as employees who can also unionize.
Adrian Arrington, a former college football player, is giving his name to the NCAA class action lawsuit, alleging that the federation and its members were negligent in treating concussions in students and athletes. In particular, the plaintiffs` attack recently adopted the NCAA`s rules for concussions, as the athlete must report the concussion. In late 2017, Justice Claudia Wilken granted final approval for a $208 million settlement in the statewide class action lawsuit over NCAA caps on student-athlete scholarships. On March 8, 2019, Judge Wilken also ruled in favor of the class and granted the requested injunction. The injunction prohibits the NCAA from enforcing rules that establish or limit the compensation and educational benefits provided to college athletes by schools or conferences in exchange for their athletic services. UF was required by law to inform its affected athletes of its intention to comply with the citation. The case follows the legal trail traced by the O`Bannon and Alston cases, the latter having ended with the NCAA defeating unanimously in the Supreme Court. Lawyers for the plaintiffs in this lawsuit are among those involved in one or both of the previous cases, led by Steve Berman and Jeff Kessler.
(Kessler argued for the Alston plaintiffs in the Supreme Court.) And that case is currently pending before U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken, who presided over the early stages of the O`Bannon and Alston trials. The filing seeks to certify the lawsuit as a class action lawsuit, meaning it would apply to thousands of athletes and not just named plaintiffs, Arizona state male swimmer Grant House; Oregon basketball player Sedona Prince, who rose to prominence by drawing attention to the differential treatment of athletes in NCAA men`s and women`s basketball tournaments; and former Illinois football player Tymir Oliver.