Jump to content



Recent headlines from The Baltimore Sun

Photo
- - - - -

This is the Biggest Story of the Offseason- Bar None


  • Please log in to reply
109 replies to this topic

#1 eaglesinsider

eaglesinsider

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,711 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:23 AM

Liberty Christian Academy in Virginia is suing the VHSL (VA equivalent of the MPSSAA) in federal court for a violation of anti-trust laws by not allowing private schools to join. If this lawsuit succeeds it likely means that the VHSL, MPSSAA and UIL, which are the last three state associations forbidding private schools from being members, will be forced to offer admission to all non-public schools which they had previously banned.

 

From the article:

 

 

LCA filed suit “to force the Virginia High School League to end its illegal group boycott of non-public schools,” according to a news release issued Monday.

The release also states the school “is currently prohibited from competing in the VHSL playoff system and faces a rules scheme designed to prevent public schools from competing with private schools like LCA in athletic events, a scheme which violates antitrust laws.”

...It also claims the school has suffered economic injury from being excluded from the VHSL playoffs in football and basketball.

“This injury includes the fact that LCA and other non-public high schools have received, and will receive, less revenue for the exhibition of their high school football and basketball contests than they would receive in a competitive market,” the lawsuit claims.

The full article can be found here: http://www.newsadvan...1a4bcf6878.html

 

Liberty Christian Academy is supported financially by Liberty University and will be pursuing this suit with the best lawyers money can buy. This lawsuit has a chance to permanently alter the landscape of high school athletics in Maryland, Virginia and Texas. 



#2 Outside Looking In

Outside Looking In

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,187 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 07:28 AM

Liberty Christian Academy in Virginia is suing the VHSL (VA equivalent of the MPSSAA) in federal court for a violation of anti-trust laws by not allowing private schools to join. If this lawsuit succeeds it likely means that the VHSL, MPSSAA and UIL, which are the last three state associations forbidding private schools from being members, will be forced to offer admission to all non-public schools which they had previously banned.

 

From the article:

 

 

LCA filed suit “to force the Virginia High School League to end its illegal group boycott of non-public schools,” according to a news release issued Monday.

The release also states the school “is currently prohibited from competing in the VHSL playoff system and faces a rules scheme designed to prevent public schools from competing with private schools like LCA in athletic events, a scheme which violates antitrust laws.”

...It also claims the school has suffered economic injury from being excluded from the VHSL playoffs in football and basketball.

“This injury includes the fact that LCA and other non-public high schools have received, and will receive, less revenue for the exhibition of their high school football and basketball contests than they would receive in a competitive market,” the lawsuit claims.

The full article can be found here: http://www.newsadvan...1a4bcf6878.html

 

Liberty Christian Academy is supported financially by Liberty University and will be pursuing this suit with the best lawyers money can buy. This lawsuit has a chance to permanently alter the landscape of high school athletics in Maryland, Virginia and Texas. 

But if they win doesn't that mean that the privates would have to adhere to mpssaa rules if they joined?



#3 sparky1

sparky1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 246 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 07:45 AM

I think that is exactly the issue. If a private wants to join a state association it will have to follow the state association's rules. In Maryland I do not see much benefit there for the privates. They already play the publics in every sport, and i do not think there is any difficulty in getting competitiion. 



#4 RM7

RM7

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 693 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 07:58 AM

  Think it will be very interesting how this shakes out especially for the likes of Gilman and McDonogh and the WCAC. If privates would be able to enter state playoffs in MD what class would Gilman and McDonogh fall into 2A or 1A?  I’m sure all the public schools would love that.

 

  I think the WCAC might be a thing of the past is this happened. I could see all the private schools in VA joining VISSA and entering the VA State playoff system.  Wonder then if all the MD privates would get on board with a private league with a model like the MIAA.

 

 

  If MD privates can get into the state playoffs wonder what CHC and Loyola would do?  Go independent since football playoffs start the second week of November which would conflict with the turkey bowl?

 

  Myself I would love to see state wide playoffs in all sports with privates and publics competing against one another.  I know some feel the privates might be to overpowering, but in the long run I think things would even out.  


Edited by RM7, 05 June 2014 - 08:11 AM.


#5 Guest_harcohorns_*

Guest_harcohorns_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 June 2014 - 08:38 AM

Even if it ended up that MPSSAA would have to let them be members they still could give them their own classification for the State playoffs like Jersey does.  They also could enact some enrollment multiplier for them for classification.   Imagine a school like ECA with less than a 100 students in 1A... They would make the Dunbar situation look like childs play..



#6 RM7

RM7

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 693 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 09:10 AM

Even if it ended up that MPSSAA would have to let them be members they still could give them their own classification for the State playoffs like Jersey does.  They also could enact some enrollment multiplier for them for classification.   Imagine a school like ECA with less than a 100 students in 1A... They would make the Dunbar situation look like childs play..

 

  Ya but they wouldn't be allowed to have guys playing 5+ years of high school football either.  All the privates would have to change the way they business. 

 

  I think you would also see more of the higher profile players staying at their home school since they would see the privates in the playoffs.  



#7 DayWalker

DayWalker

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,306 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 09:10 AM

Any entity with two dimes to rub together, and even those without, can file lawsuits.  This one will be another more likely done in summary judgment, if it makes it that far.  This is another little to do about NOTHING, especially when this suit is supposedly in Virginia.  We are not talking about a Supreme Court national suit here.

 

Again, a little to do about absolutely nothing.



#8 eaglesinsider

eaglesinsider

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,711 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 10:04 AM

Any entity with two dimes to rub together, and even those without, can file lawsuits.  This one will be another more likely done in summary judgment, if it makes it that far.  This is another little to do about NOTHING, especially when this suit is supposedly in Virginia.  We are not talking about a Supreme Court national suit here.

 

Again, a little to do about absolutely nothing.

 

I know I shouldn't feed the troll, but this is a massive deal. It is filed in FEDERAL COURT, as I stated, which if appealed high enough can make it to the Supreme Court. You didn't think that cases started in the Supreme Court did you? A judgement in federal court means that there is now precedent. In law, once precedent is established it makes it much more likely that subsequent cases arguing the same will be successful. Do you really think the MPSSAA would be willing to risk a lawsuit from the Maryland private schools arguing the same thing the Liberty Christian is arguing here if there is already established precedent saying that a state athletic organization is violating federal anti-trust laws by forbidding private schools from being members?



#9 GREYHOUND ALUM

GREYHOUND ALUM

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,748 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 11:15 AM

I know I shouldn't feed the troll, but this is a massive deal. It is filed in FEDERAL COURT, as I stated, which if appealed high enough can make it to the Supreme Court. You didn't think that cases started in the Supreme Court did you? A judgement in federal court means that there is now precedent. In law, once precedent is established it makes it much more likely that subsequent cases arguing the same will be successful. Do you really think the MPSSAA would be willing to risk a lawsuit from the Maryland private schools arguing the same thing the Liberty Christian is arguing here if there is already established precedent saying that a state athletic organization is violating federal anti-trust laws by forbidding private schools from being members?


I think in theory it's a very big deal, but with the rules as they are I don't see many Privates jumping ship. I think the Baltimore privates will look at what happened to the City schools when they left the MSA and that will be a huge red flag. I also don't see the point in going the NJ route, it just brings in the rules of the State association and no real benefits.

#10 RM7

RM7

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 693 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 11:54 AM

I think in theory it's a very big deal, but with the rules as they are I don't see many Privates jumping ship. I think the Baltimore privates will look at what happened to the City schools when they left the MSA and that will be a huge red flag. I also don't see the point in going the NJ route, it just brings in the rules of the State association and no real benefits.

 

Don't think you can compare the two because I don't think the privates would be mixed in with the publics.   They would be in their own league and the qualifiers would advance from the leagues for the states. 



#11 gillytech

gillytech

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,329 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 12:08 PM

Any entity with two dimes to rub together, and even those without, can file lawsuits.  This one will be another more likely done in summary judgment, if it makes it that far.  This is another little to do about NOTHING, especially when this suit is supposedly in Virginia.  We are not talking about a Supreme Court national suit here.

 

Again, a little to do about absolutely nothing.

 

This is completely off base.  To expand on EI's points above, Federal District Court holdings concerning Federal issues (like Antitrust) are binding authority in that district, and persuasive authority in all Federal Districts.  Also, if upheld at the Circuit Court level, the holding would be binding authority throughout that Federal Judicial Circuit.  Therefore, a holding in this case would be binding authority in MD if it is upheld at the Circuit Court level since MD is in the 4th District along with DC, NC & SC (in addition to VA).

 

I do agree that this case will likely be decided via summary judgment since I don't see a lot of factual issues that would need to be sorted out by a jury, but I could see it going either way.



#12 HSFBLover

HSFBLover

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 780 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 12:23 PM

To me I think it would make a lot more sense to have a state wide private league.

Garenteed regional games against powers, still able to go OOS... A more competitive play off... Instead of 4 teams, or no playoff at all in some cases

#13 GREYHOUND ALUM

GREYHOUND ALUM

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11,748 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 12:28 PM

Don't think you can compare the two because I don't think the privates would be mixed in with the publics.   They would be in their own league and the qualifiers would advance from the leagues for the states. 


I'm talking about rules like Recruiting, travel and OOS games. Just don't see the Privates wanting to abide by those rules. And we definitely know that Loyola and CHC wouldn't join. I think the more likely scenario would be some teams joining but you would see the big Privates finally forming their own league. I think that would be a more likely outcome.

#14 DayWalker

DayWalker

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,306 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 12:54 PM

The courts are inundated with frivolous lawsuits daily all across this country in our litigious society and this very well has all the classic wrappings of yet another very frivolous and wasteful time of our court system.  So you mean to tell me that some entity needs a federal judge to tell that entity and some other entity to sit down and work out their differences!!!  Because that's what, if anything is going to happen.

 

Many of you guys have TV or movie takes on life and no clue of what goes down in the real world.  Hell some guy Allen Heckard once sued Phillip Knight, the founder of Nike, and Michael Jordan for $800-million because Heckard claimed to damages because people frequently mistook for the Mike.

 

Anyone can file a lawsuit is what I'm saying and just because some yoyo Virginia sports organization suits another yoyo Virginia high school governing organization adds no legitimacy to the suit.  This one just sounds like big men acting like little boys just need to set down and talk and figure out, They Don't Have A Damn Thing To Sue About...



#15 gillytech

gillytech

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,329 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:08 PM

The courts are inundated with frivolous lawsuits daily all across this country in our litigious society and this very well has all the classic wrappings of yet another very frivolous and wasteful time of our court system.  So you mean to tell me that some entity needs a federal judge to tell that entity and some other entity to sit down and work out their differences!!!  Because that's what, if anything is going to happen.

 

Many of you guys have TV or movie takes on life and no clue of what goes down in the real world.  Hell some guy Allen Heckard once sued Phillip Knight, the founder of Nike, and Michael Jordan for $800-million because Heckard claimed to damages because people frequently mistook for the Mike.

 

Anyone can file a lawsuit is what I'm saying and just because some yoyo Virginia sports organization suits another yoyo Virginia high school governing organization adds no legitimacy to the suit.  This one just sounds like big men acting like little boys just need to set down and talk and figure out, They Don't Have A Damn Thing To Sue About...

 

Thanks Chief, but I'm a lawyer who has handled state and Federal cases involving antitrust/sports law claims, so I think I know what I'm talking about.   And yes, often times "some entity needs a federal judge to tell that entity and some other entity to sit down and work out their differences" - that's sorta the whole premise of mediation.  That being said, if the plaintiffs win this case, the judge won't tell them and the defendants to sit down and work out their differences; he'll tell the defendants they have to include the plaintiffs in their system.


Edited by gillytech, 05 June 2014 - 01:14 PM.


#16 gillytech

gillytech

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,329 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:14 PM

double post - please delete
 


Edited by gillytech, 05 June 2014 - 01:14 PM.


#17 DayWalker

DayWalker

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,306 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:19 PM

Then Judge Judy, you should know that you can have nine members of the Supreme Court consider issues and very frequently opin 5 to 4 so what makes you think YOU have cornered the market on jurisprudence counselor and really know what you're talking about?


Edited by DayWalker, 05 June 2014 - 01:20 PM.


#18 DayWalker

DayWalker

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,306 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:43 PM

Thanks Chief, but I'm a lawyer who has handled state and Federal cases involving antitrust/sports law claims, so I think I know what I'm talking about.   And yes, often times "some entity needs a federal judge to tell that entity and some other entity to sit down and work out their differences" - that's sorta the whole premise of mediation.  That being said, if the plaintiffs win this case, the judge won't tell them and the defendants to sit down and work out their differences; he'll tell the defendants they have to include the plaintiffs in their system.

 

And in response to your addtional comment, just how experienced are you in state and federal cases to come away with the thought that judges in our Let's Make A Deal legal system actually decide such cases???  Come on gillyT, judges in such peanut cases are NOT going to waste time in court sessions deciding anything.  You know or should know and I KNOW, the judge isn't going to tell anyone to do anything in the prima facia matter.  He/she will convence the "children" involved to settle their own differences.  Again, the judge isn't going to just tell - order - the "respondents"; not defendants, to do anything for the matter to be appealed for more litigation.  His/her clerks will get the children to talk / settle.

 

You did say you handled state and fed cases, did you not....


Edited by DayWalker, 05 June 2014 - 02:38 PM.


#19 DayWalker

DayWalker

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,306 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 03:10 PM

I know I shouldn't feed the troll, but this is a massive deal. It is filed in FEDERAL COURT, as I stated, which if appealed high enough can make it to the Supreme Court. You didn't think that cases started in the Supreme Court did you? A judgement in federal court means that there is now precedent. In law, once precedent is established it makes it much more likely that subsequent cases arguing the same will be successful. Do you really think the MPSSAA would be willing to risk a lawsuit from the Maryland private schools arguing the same thing the Liberty Christian is arguing here if there is already established precedent saying that a state athletic organization is violating federal anti-trust laws by forbidding private schools from being members?

 

EI,

 

I hate to burst your bubble BUT please settle down and think about this before you run off talking about this being a massive deal and it's in the federal court in all caps.  It really only tells me that you really just don't understand the ways of the real world.  You are like one in The Matrix.  Supreme Court you say!!  Come on eagle, just what chances to you think that could possibly happen????  With all the far reaching legal issues facing the nation, you really see a call for the Supreme Court to take up your sports issue where there are more anti-trust exemptions than any discipline!!!!  Really dude?  Assuming the lower court decision, if there is one, makes it through the appeals process, do you really think four Supreme Court justices ( the rule of four ) would be willing to bring such a matter before the entire court????  Really!!!  And do you understand that maybe...maybe....maybe as many as 70 to 80 cases are heard by the Supreme Court each year and that you would have a better chance of really growing wings and actually fly like a real eagle.  Come on eagle, touch back to earth.  This AIN'T no massive deal.



#20 gillytech

gillytech

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,329 posts

Posted 05 June 2014 - 03:29 PM

And in response to your addtional comment, just how experienced are you in state and federal cases to come away with the thought that judges in our Let's Make A Deal legal system actually decide such cases???  Come on gillyT, judges in such peanut cases are NOT going to waste time in court sessions deciding anything.  You know or should know and I KNOW, the judge isn't going to tell anyone to do anything in the prima facia matter.  He/she will convence the "children" involved to settle their own differences.  Again, the judge isn't going to just tell - order - the "respondents"; not defendants, to do anything for the matter to be appealed for more litigation.  His/her clerks will get the children to talk / settle.

 

You did say you handled state and fed cases, did you not....

 

You have no idea what you're talking about and you are incorrectly using terms you do not understand.  I was a clerk for a Federal Judge, and like I said I've also tried Federal and state cases dealing with antitrust cases, so I have a little bit of experience and I've seen cases rise to bench trials regularly, so it's absurd to say you "know" the judge will convince them to settle their differences.  Will the judge try?  Sure, and parties in most Federal cases are required to submit to mediation, but parties can't always be convinced to settle.  At the district court level, LCA is the plaintiff and VHSL is the defendant.  If LCA wins and the VHSL appeals, LCA would be the respondent and VHSL would be the appellant (with the roles being switched in the event LCA loses at the district level and appeals).  Finally, your spelled the term "prima facie" wrong and used it incorrectly.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users