NCAA Wants Documents Sealed

[Diggler]

I win many more arguments. besides, why would anyone ever sue the NCAA, they are like the Easter Bunny, harmless do-gooders who wouldn't hurt a flea.

I'm pretty sure you don't. Unless you are counting the arguments you still have with first graders about Power Rangers.

[Goon]

on the other hand, almost all fans here a few pages back wanted the NCAA records released, and were wondering what a public organization like the NCAA was hiding. I would assume all the fans that were calling for the public airing of NCAA dirty laundry would also call for the airing of und's dirty laundry. all of the arguments would be exactly the same, only more so, since und should certainly not hide anything from it's own fans, students, and citizens.

Don't you have anything better to do than cruising the Sioux Sports Message board.

[happy]

Don't you have anything better to do than cruising the Sioux Sports Message board.

no, do you?

actually, I am stalking dirty, and sometimes I have to follow him to the depths of hell.

[Diggler]

no, do you?

actually, I am stalking dirty, and sometimes I have to follow him to the depths of hell.

I'm honored.

[Goon]

no, do you?

actually, I am stalking dirty, and sometimes I have to follow him to the depths of hell.

Well that explains it.

[The Sicatoka]

UND wins protective order motion

Jahnke approved UND's argument in his ruling, writing: "The purpose of this litigation is not to determine whether UND's use of Native American imagery and the term 'Fighting Sioux' are 'hostile and abusive.' That issue involves First Amendment and due process issues not before this court."

Now who was that really, really smart guy that brought up that point when this issue came up .....

"This ruling is exactly what Judge Jahnke said at the very beginning of the lawsuit and now he's reiterated it," Stenehjem said.

However, and not surprisingly to me,

Exempted from the ruling is one NCAA request which asks for documents related to the actual impact of the continued use of the Fighting Sioux nickname. ...

Stenehjem speculated that request may have been approved because it relates to UND's claim that a ban on the nickname would unfairly restrain trade in North Dakota.

[GeauxSioux]

Also important....

The ruling denies most of the NCAA's requests and states UND will not have to answer future NCAA documents requests related to:

-- Whether the Fighting Sioux nickname is "hostile and abusive."

-- UND's relationship with the family of Ralph Engelstad, the UND benefactor who donated the school's $100 million Ralph Engelstad Arena.

-- UND dealings with the federal Office of Civil Rights.

-- American Indian programs at UND.

[Rick]

UND wins protective order motion

Now who was that really, really smart guy that brought up that point when this issue came up .....

I believe it was UNDLAW or Release the Commodore over a beer at Martini's Bar in Iowa City on April 4th.

[The Sicatoka]

[i believe it was UNDLAW or Release the Commodore over a beer at Martini's Bar in Iowa City on April 4th.

Oh, that's just cold, so thus I must ask:

Why the (bleep) would you have a beer at a place called "Martini's"?

[Diggler]

Oh, that's just cold, so thus I must ask:

Why the (bleep) would you have a beer at a place called "Martini's"?

Cause Clarence, your guardian angel, wants to.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

Glad this happened. After all the lectures about "settling out of court" and "keeping costs down", to allow some sort of fishing expedition would be totally counterproductive and only lead to more litigation down the road.

No matter what the letters to/from North Dakota to/from a wealthy supporter could have possibly said, what difference would it have made to the case? I can't think of anything here. As noted, even if the University pledged to the Englestads that they would defend the nickname to the end-what would that prove in this litigation?

Federal Civil Rights correspondence? That's a stretch. Either its a matter of public record already, or there's a good reason why it isn't (and shouldn't be). Besides, most of those investigations come in response to complaints; and I'd imagine most of the complainers will be right outside the door of the courthouse during the trial, looking for anyone willing to listen (again) to their "grievences".

American Indian programs at UND? Isn't that also already a matter of public record? And again, even if no such program ever existed at all at UND, what would it matter here?

All in all, I hope that this also signals a "no nonsense" attitude from the judge as regards the entire case.

[Goon]

Glad this happened. After all the lectures about "settling out of court" and "keeping costs down", to allow some sort of fishing expedition would be totally counterproductive and only lead to more litigation down the road.

No matter what the letters to/from North Dakota to/from a wealthy supporter could have possibly said, what difference would it have made to the case? I can't think of anything here. As noted, even if the University pledged to the Englestads that they would defend the nickname to the end-what would that prove in this litigation?

Federal Civil Rights correspondence? That's a stretch. Either its a matter of public record already, or there's a good reason why it isn't (and shouldn't be). Besides, most of those investigations come in response to complaints; and I'd imagine most of the complainers will be right outside the door of the courthouse during the trial, looking for anyone willing to listen (again) to their "grievences".

American Indian programs at UND? Isn't that also already a matter of public record? And again, even if no such program ever existed at all at UND, what would it matter here?

All in all, I hope that this also signals a "no nonsense" attitude from the judge as regards the entire case.

Civil Rights, how about the 1st Amendment being violated. I am not a lawyer nor did I stay at a Holiday INN express last night but I do think the NCAA has to know their case is weak when they are all over the place in asking for all kinds of stuff that doesn't even apply to the law suit. I think the Judge insisting that the party settle out of court must be good for UND? I think the NCAA is going to eventually figure out that is going to lose. I could see them taking this to the Supreme court on appeal but they aren't probably going to get any love with the Skalia Court.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

I could see them taking this to the Supreme court on appeal but they aren't probably going to get any love with the Skalia Court.

If the two parties are getting the "let's not waste the court's time" lecture from the initial judge, imagine the reaction if they try to get it before the Supreme Court.

And that might take upwards of 5 years. In that case, I hope you guys get a TRO if it doesn't go your way.

[GeauxSioux]

UND LAWSUIT: NCAA asks judge to dismiss UND antitrust claim

NCAA attorneys asked a Grand Forks judge on Tuesday to dismiss the antitrust portion of UND's lawsuit against the association over a policy banning the school from displaying its Fighting Sioux nickname and logo in postseason play or hosting playoff games.

In a motion for partial judgement, the NCAA claims UND hasn't proven that the association's policy banning what it considers "hostile and abusive" American Indian imagery in postseason play will restrict competition at large, only that the policy puts UND at a competitive disadvantage.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

....the NCAA claims.... that the policy puts UND at a competitive disadvantage.

Now as I recall, didn't the NCAA claim that there policy wasn't "punative" towards individual schools?

Doesn't this latest claim contradict that statement (which everyone knew was a lie)??

(edit) Also, how can you claim that you are setting up a second class of membership, summarily demoting a school: and then try to deny anti-trust violations? The NCAA almost got hauled in front of Congress for the BCS bowls and had to create another "Bowl" to placate the Boise States, Tulanes, etc. Why would North Dakota voluntarily take this demotion?

[The Sicatoka]

UND won a preliminary injunction in November, allowing the school to retain its logo and nickname until the case goes to trial in December.

Dear Mr. Marks (and GF Herald):

" ... allowing to retain ... "?

UND can keep the "Fighting Sioux" moniker if it so chooses.

It would just be that the NCAA would discriminate against them at national competitions (and tell its members to discriminate against UND by not scheduling regular season contests). And the NCAA would continue to discriminate against Engelstad Arena because of a picture hung on the walls there.

(Ya'know, playing that "discrimination" card is a blast. )

[PCM]

Now as I recall, didn't the NCAA claim that there policy wasn't "punative" towards individual schools?

You are correct.

Doesn't this latest claim contradict that statement (which everyone knew was a lie)??

I'd say so.

[PCM]

In a motion for partial judgement, the NCAA claims UND hasn't proven that the association's policy banning what it considers "hostile and abusive" American Indian imagery in postseason play will restrict competition at large, only that the policy puts UND at a competitive disadvantage.

Perhaps one of our legal experts can explain this. Why does North Dakota have to prove anything at this point? The state hasn't presented its case in court. Isn't it up to the jury to decide whether the NCAA has violated the anti-trust law? As Jahnke wrote in his ruling on the preliminary injunction:

Nonetheless, the court emphasizes that the determinations on the issues

raised in this matter are preliminary. They are based on the limited evidence

presented to date. Neither party should attempt to predict the ultimate

outcome of this litigation based on the court

[ScottM]

I think, and have thought, UND's antitrust claims were always a bit flimsy to begin with, especially under the NoDak statute. To avoid Summary Judgment, and it's spelled j-u-d-g-m-e-n-t Mr. Marks, UND will need to show there are facts in dispute that a jury will need to rectify. I presume in any counter-filing, UND will try to show some economic impact or harm as a result of diminished competition. I'm not sure how they can do that, but I presume they will have already thought about that. I wouldn't be surprised if Jahnke sides with the NC$$ on this one, but it's not necessarily fatal to the rest of UND's claims, and may help focus on issues easier for a jury to digest.

[SiouxMD]

[url="http://www.grandforksherald.com/articles/index.cfm?id=37269

[GeauxSioux]

UND won a preliminary injunction allowing the school to retain its nickname and logo without consequences until the case reaches trial Dec. 10.

Someone has been reading Sica's posts.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

I presume in any counter-filing, UND will try to show some economic impact or harm as a result of diminished competition. I'm not sure how they can do that, but I presume they will have already thought about that. I wouldn't be surprised if Jahnke sides with the NC$$ on this one, but it's not necessarily fatal to the rest of UND's claims, and may help focus on issues easier for a jury to digest.

Money makes the world go 'round; the world go round....

I wish I had more than a Broadway show tune to support my argument, but without some economic impact against these schools, what hammer would the NCAA have? "This won't cost you a cent but if you keep the nickname "Sioux" we'll all say 'shame on you' and look at you in a lesser light"? They've already discussed not letting Illinois play in bowl games.

Whenever the NCAA discovers some violations, the first thing they do is hand out economic penalties. You lose your share of basketball revenues, or they limit scholarships (with the idea that you'll lose games and attendance). Money: its what they do.

BTW, as long as we're talking lawsuits, here's a bit of news on the Illiniwek lawsuit:

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/200...d_chief_lawsuit

I always thought our so-called appeal was late and weak. And been its common knowledge for a very, very long time that a LOT of people thought the Board of Trustees would attempt to say "hey, the NCAA tied our hands here". I hope they dig up some real documentation.

[GeauxSioux]

Judge delays ruling on NCAA request

Grand Forks Judge Lawrence Jahnke delayed ruling Thursday on an NCAA motion to dismiss UND's antitrust claim in the legal battle over the school's continued use of its Fighting Sioux nickname.

In an order e-mailed to UND and NCAA attorneys, Jahnke said he would not rule on the NCAA motion until both sides complete their discovery processes Sept. 7. Jahnke stated his decision to delay judgment should not be interpreted as a statement on the merits of UND's antitrust claim.

“This deferral should not to (sic) be construed by either party as an indication by the trial court that it feels the antitrust claim does or does not have merit,” Jahnke wrote. “However, the court feels that the NCAA's motion for a dismissal of that particular claim is a bit premature.”

I see this as both good and bad news for Sioux fans. Bad news in that the costs for lawsuit will increase more, but I also believe that this puts more pressure on the NCAA to perhaps settle out of court. Even if the NCAA believes they are right on the issue of antitrust, the judge may not see it their way. I'm not sure how much precedence they have on this issue. Any legal minds have any insight on that??

[jimdahl]

The most interesting part of that article, to me, was:

The NCAA subsequently argued the protective order should not apply to records of conversations between UND officials and area Sioux tribes, saying knowledge of those conversations is relevant to its defense. Jahnke reaffirmed Thursday those records don't fall within the scope of the trial.

UND officials met several times with area Sioux tribes in the spring of 2006 in an attempt to negotiate tribal approval for the nickname.

I've repeatedly said that the only way I see UND still with this nickname in the long-run is with NCAA-approved tribal approval. Nice to see some confirmation that they weren't ignoring that avenue.

[sioux7>5]

The most interesting part of that article, to me, was:

I've repeatedly said that the only way I see UND still with this nickname in the long-run is with NCAA-approved tribal approval. Nice to see some confirmation that they weren't ignoring that avenue.

My question is what about the original document from the Spirit Lake Reservation that said that they approved of the nickname, why is that being recognized? That should be enough.