UND's court filings

[ScottM]

IMHO, this Coasian Solution approach would have made sense if the NCAA actually had attempted it. Instead, what the NCAA is doing is giving the wealthiest (Florida State, Utah) a free pass, taxing the poor (Southeastern Oklahoma, Chowan), and gouging the middle class (UND, La-Monroe, Ark St., IUP). The middle income group gets hurt the worst because the changes are almost or more costly than the upper class, have less of an income base to pay for changes and can least afford to alienate their smaller fan base.

To achieve this, Oberstrumfurher Brand and his lackeys would have had to admit that schools have a bona fide financial stake in their names and logos, whether acceptable, hostile, abusive or just plain weird.

Moreover, I think, beyond the merely financial impact of a judgment in favor of UND, even if the damages were $1, the NC$$ faces the specter of a precedent which could undermine its authority to negotiate TV deals, endorsements, etc. or other matters related to schools' teams. Schools would have the ability, and perhaps the right, to drive their own economics through their athletic departments. If UND wins, it will effectively be a "Declaration of Independence" from the ad hoc controls of a group of myopic, disengaged academics who fail to understand the "Athletic" part of their organization's name. At the very least, it would force the NC$$ to abide by its own rules.

[The Sicatoka]

IMHO, this Coasian Solution approach would have made sense if the NCAA actually had attempted it.

Ironically (and perhaps just hopeful thinking), the NCAA may end up paying much more.

I'm thinking a judge may force them (NCAA) into enacting a Coasian Solution. How about this one: Dear NCAA, you must either (a) grant UND the same waiver as FSU, or (b) pay all of UND's bills for a moniker change (from facilities like REA, turf at The Al, to stationery letterhead), plus anything fans want to "exchange" for updated moniker materials, like jackets, jerseys, flags, license plate frames, anything. I say that last part as partial compensation for Complaint point 82 (see below).

Yes, it could cost them much more in the end than if they'd have done it up front.

[The Sicatoka]

The Say Anything Blog has been quoting $2.6 Million in damages as what UND is asking:North Dakota Alleges $2.6 Million In Damages Over UND Logo

A more complete accounting from the preliminary injunction statement:

130. Compliance with the portion of the Policy that would allow UND to compete inchampionship competition (although never at home regardless of win-loss record) would require UND to purchase multiple sets of uniforms and athletic paraphernalia, including, but not limited to, actual game uniforms, game warm-ups, travel bags, sideline attire, coaches

[PCM]

The cost of these measures is difficult to ascertain with precision because of the sheer volume of affected items. The estimated cost is approximately $178,140

I had to chuckle about that part. The difficult to ascertain, imprecise amount is $178,140.

[The Sicatoka]

I had to chuckle about that part. The difficult to ascertain, imprecise amount is $178,140.

Like someone once said to me, "Preliminary estimates indicate ... "

Is there anywhere to track this case on-line?

[The Sicatoka]

Back on October 6, written by everyone's favorite USCHO reporter:

"Stenehjem said the NCAA has 20 days to file an answer to the lawsuit and that a hearing on the preliminary injunction would probably take place within the next 13 days."

Well, it's 13 days later. So, where (what?) is the story?

Motions? Responses? Dates?

Hell-l-l-l-l-loooooooo? Grand Forks Herald? ....

[mksioux]

Back on October 6, written by everyone's favorite USCHO reporter:

Well, it's 13 days later. So, where (what?) is the story?

Motions? Responses? Dates?

Hell-l-l-l-l-loooooooo? Grand Forks Herald? ....

Not sure where the AG came up with that 13 day expectation. I don't expect anything to happen until the 20th day. Most likely it will be a notice of removal to federal court filed by the NCAA.

[HockeyMom]

From the Forum:

Court hearing on Fighting Sioux nickname set for Nov. 9

[southpaw]

From the Forum:

Court hearing on Fighting Sioux nickname set for Nov. 9

the judge, lawrence jahnke, is a UND graduate. he was appointed by gov. george sinner (democrat)... so i don't know how much you want to read into that. a quote from jahnke:

what I dislike the most is dealing with egomaniac lawyers (and judges). Fortunately, their number is few in North Dakota.

hopefully, the ncaa comes in thinking they're the best thing since holy cross.

[jloos]

the judge, lawrence jahnke, is a UND graduate. he was appointed by gov. george sinner (democrat)... so i don't know how much you want to read into that. a quote from jahnke:

hopefully, the ncaa comes in thinking they're the best thing since holy cross.

Jahnke is one tough dude. He is the one who was shot on the bench about 15 years ago.

Here is his bio from the NDSC:

Born in 1942, Minneapolis, MN. Undergrad: UND - June 1964 (B.S.B.A.). J.D. degree University of North Dakota 1966. Active duty as Judge Advocate, United States Air Force 1966-86. Private practice 1986-89. Appointed District Judge May 1989 by Governor George A. Sinner. Elected District Judge in 1990, 1996, and 2002. Admitted to North Dakota, Montana, and Federal District Court for North Dakota, United States Supreme Court, and United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. Married. Wife, Shirley. Three children.

He is a tough military guy, but from my experiences with him, he is very fair and very nice guy. He will base his opinion solely on the law and will not be swayed by politics.

[LeftyZL]

For anyone out there....Is it standard procedure to have that initial deadline extended? I was hoping to hear the NCAA's stance on the lawsuit but that article states that they were allowed more time by having the deadline extended. Is that common practice?

[The Sicatoka]

Is it safe to assume that no matter what happens in ND District Court the decision will be appealed by one side or the other (probably first to the ND Supreme Court, and then probably to the Federal court system)?

[HockeyMom]

Everything with court takes way longer than you would expect it to.......I'd say that the whole thing is going to take years to be sorted through.

Sometimes, it just goes to the person that is willing to hang in there and fight the longest. I think that the NCAA doubted UND's determination and strength.

Never.....underestimate your opponent.

[jloos]

Is it safe to assume that no matter what happens in ND District Court the decision will be appealed by one side or the other (probably first to the ND Supreme Court, and then probably to the Federal court system)?

The Federal Courts cannot not touch the NDSC's decisions unless there is a federal question. If the Federal Courts get involved it will be right away. UND was very careful to file the suit under ND law. I am sure the NCAA's lawyers are looking for a way to get it bumped to Federal Court. The more I look at the Complaint and Brief supporting the temp. injunction, the more I doubt this will get moved to Federal Court. The folks at the AG's office did a very good job. I hope the people on this board living in ND remember this in a couple of weeks at the polls. Wayne Stenehjem and his staff have done a great job so far.

[The Sicatoka]

The more I look at the Complaint and Brief supporting the temp. injunction, the more I doubt this will get moved to Federal Court.

In the event of a UND win, how does UND get a decision from an ND court enforced in Florence, AL, or St. Louis, MO, or Indianapolis, IN, or anywhere else not in ND? North Dakota laws or court rulings have no jurisdiction outside of North Dakota.

[redwing77]

In the event of a UND win, how does UND get a decision from an ND court enforced in Florence, AL, or St. Louis, MO, or Indianapolis, IN, or anywhere else not in ND? North Dakota laws or court rulings have no jurisdiction outside of North Dakota.

Legally, I have no clue. I'm no lawyer.

However, I can make a guess.

My guess is that UND just wants to get the NCAA of its back and could really care less about the rest of the NCAA. After all, FSU and CMU and Utah got handled individually and their decisions held no affect on anyone else. Other colleges really have done nothing but stand back and watch and wait with what UND is doing. Perhaps Kupchella and gang decided that it is everyone for themselves and that's why?

[PCM]

In the event of a UND win, how does UND get a decision from an ND court enforced in Florence, AL, or St. Louis, MO, or Indianapolis, IN, or anywhere else not in ND? North Dakota laws or court rulings have no jurisdiction outside of North Dakota.

What would be the point of filing the case in state court if the judgement couldn't be applied outside the state? Is North Dakota's legal team really that dim?

Or does the state court ruling set the legal precedent nationally unless or until the ruling is overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court?

[jloos]

UND's lawsuit is solely based on the contract between UND and the NCAA. A Judgment in North Dakota is legally enforceable in every state under the US Constitution (full faith and credit clause) - Art IV I think. If UND prevails in the lawsuit, they will receive damages for the NCAA's breach and an injunction preventing them from their sanctions. Jurisdiction follows UND wherever it goes in the US. The only way the feds would get involved is if the ND ruling were inconsistent with federal law.

The problem with this suit is that it is only a temporary solution. The NCAA can amend their bylaws if they receive an unfavorable ruling. I think that has already been discussed. I have no idea how difficult it would be for them to do this, but they would have to make it an across the board rule. So if there is no Sioux, there will be no Seminoles, Fighting Irish or any other human moniker/mascot.

This is the way I see things anyway. I am far from an expert in this type of law. If UND wants to divorce the NCAA - I'm the man to call

Sicatoka - That will be $500, the bill is in the mail.

[rochsioux]

The folks at the AG's office did a very good job. I hope the people on this board living in ND remember this in a couple of weeks at the polls. Wayne Stenehjem and his staff have done a great job so far.

So, anyone know what will happen to the lawsuit if Stenehjem is not re-elected ? Would the new attorney general have to or be inclined to pursue the case ?

[PCM]

Sicatoka - That will be $500, the bill is in the mail.

He's good for it.

[PCM]

So, anyone know what will happen to the lawsuit if Stenehjem is not re-elected ? Would the new attorney general have to or be inclined to pursue the case ?

Stenehjem's opponent (I can't remeber his name) has criticized him for being involved in the lawsuit. I don't think there's much chance of Wayne losing the election, however.

[THETRIOUXPER]

Stenehjem's opponent (I can't remeber his name) has criticized him for being involved in the lawsuit. I don't think there's much chance of Wayne losing the election, however.

"Dewey beats Truman"

[82SiouxGuy]

Stenehjem's opponent (I can't remeber his name) has criticized him for being involved in the lawsuit. I don't think there's much chance of Wayne losing the election, however.

I am not an attorney and don't play one on this board, but I believe that the AG and his office are working for the University and the State Board of Higher Education (the clients). I don't think a new AG would have much choice in the matter. The only thing he could possibly do is not work as hard on the case. That would be risky politically if it could be proven.

[Goon]

I will make a prediction and say that its a pretty good bet that Stenehjem will be re-elected.

[GeauxSioux]

What kind of an arrangement do the member schools have the NCAA? Is it a contract that is annually renewed? The reason that I ask is because of what occured last season in hockey. Originally the "offending schools" were going to be required to cover any logos if they were hosting events after Feb. 1st. I recall that during the appeal process the NCAA was supposed to respond sometime in January and pushed it back until the end of April. Was this because they had contracts for hosting these events with some of the schools and couldn't require that they cover the logos for contractual reasons? Hence my reason for asking the contract question.

Also, some on this message board have pointed out the committee that mandated this change has overstepped their bounds. If that is the case, can't the membership as a whole vote on an issue such as this or is a vote not in UND's best interest? I realize we are quite possibly past the point of having a vote. Just a question.