Several of their guys are just nervous that trinidad might not get cleared.
Printable View
Several of their guys are just nervous that trinidad might not get cleared.
Interesting that Rick Cleveland felt the need to speculate in a published article Chambliss will get another year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pancho
It seems that there are no rules to anything anymore; don’t get your way, just find the right judge. I was surprised he was denied initially.Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardDrayton
He's been denied twice, maybe even 3 times.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlSwearengen
Judge whitwell is a Mississippi alumn and a fan. And he's elected.
No way he doesn't rule in Trinidad favor.
Would you rule in KT favor if it was his case?
This doesn't seem right. If it were this simple, every player that gets turned down would sue in their district.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
ETA... what power does the court have to overrule the ncaa's ruling?
ETA2... just saw the Rutgers player sue and judge get him eligibility. Not sure these cases are similar
I figure the NCAA will take it to a federal court after that inevitable ruling.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
When would a federal court hear the case? Will he be allowed to be a team member and participate if the fed hearing is put off until say early November? Just wondering how all this works and if Trinidad is receiving his initial 26 cash installments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd4State
During the Tyler years, we got an injunction from a local judge allowing Larry Gillard and Richard Blackmore (I think) to continue playing. The MS Supreme Court, probably all OM grads, ruled against us on appeal. We were forced to forfeit 19 games, which still count against our overall record as losses, even though we won on the field.Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd4State
This will drag on as long as the NCAA wants to get it overturned if found in Chambliss's favor at any level.
I don't know how they can appeal a Chancery Court decision to a federal court.Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd4State
It is my understanding that the goal isn't to get a ruling - its to get a Temporary Restraining Order.
You get that - he can then play.
You would need to then have an actual hearing on the merits of the underlying case to have that set aside. That can take a bunch of time, and by next December its a moot point.
At that point, the only thing that would matter is if the NCAA would care about having the wins 'forfeited'.
A real lawyer can correct me if I'm wrong.
If it's this simple, why does any team accept no for an answer from the ncaa?Quote:
Originally Posted by HancockCountyDog
Because you have to get a judge to rule in your favor, and usually there's very little evidence to get that.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
The ncaa should win this with a neutral judge, but that is not the case here.
Also, can only go to federal court if there is a federal law claim (there is not here) or the parties "reside" in different states (they don't here because the ncaa is said to reside wherever its members are, which is in all 50 states). But with no federal law antitrust claim, PL argument is harder to make here. They are banking on a OM fan as the judge.
More of these are being filed in state courts because PL lawyers know they are more likely to get less sophisticated judges who have allegiance to the teams than if filed in federal court. That is the case here. Trinidad's actual claim sucks, but he has a judge who is a fan.
Surely the defendant will ask him to recuse himselfQuote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
Nah. a temporary order will be filed and a date will be set in january of 27. end of story
They can. And the judge decides if he wants to grant it or not. He has the discretion. A lot of judges get pissed when you ask.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
You also have the issue of who it gets reassigned to if he does.
All the judges are probably state or Mississippi fans. Small state. And one of only a small few with elected judges.
Depends on how important the player is.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
It could be as simple as this, but something seems amiss in this to me. I mean in theory, couldn't they have sued the ncaa in the same way when the ncaa leveled the penalties against them and freeze?Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
Who is they? Freeze? Sure he could have tried.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
This is a player, not Mississippi, suing the ncaa under a breach of contract theory wherein he alleges that the ncaa had a contract with Mississippi and the ncaa breached said contract which harmed Chambliss.
The argument is Chambliss, even though he was not a party to the contract, was a third party beneficiary of the contract and thus has standing to sue.
It's a tenuous argument. But in front of a judge who is a fan of Chambliss and Mississippi.
Princewell to LSU
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl...f186f7f&ei=149