Every Monday The White Bronco’s “This Week in Sports Law” previews the week to come in the sports legal world. Here is a look at what is going on this week:
[pullquote align=”full” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]Be sure to check out The White Bronco’s calendar to keep track of all of the key upcoming sports law dates.[/pullquote]
College Football is Back (and so are its Legal Issues)
Fall is around the corner and football is back. The day the many of us (including myself) have been waiting for, the kickoff of the college football season, is finally upon us. This weekend’s slate of games (surprisingly very good) includes: Oklahoma vs. Houston; LSU vs. Wisconsin (at Lambeau); Alabama vs. USC; Clemson vs. Auburn; and, Florida State vs. Ole Miss. While this is an exciting time for most, players, coaches, and teams have not been without legal troubles. The following happened in just the last week:
- The University of Miami permanently dismissed two of its best defensive players from the program for allegedly breaking NCAA rules by receiving extra benefits from a luxury car rental agency.
- The NCAA expanded its investigation into the Ole Miss football program and will interview players who were recruited by, but did not ultimately end up choosing, Ole Miss.
- An Auburn defensive back was arrested in Auburn after attempted to run from a car during a traffic stop.
- Florida State’s strength coach was arrested for DUI and property damage after police found him asleep at the wheel after he struck an electric cross walking sign.
- A Mississippi State defensive lineman was arrested for public intoxication, his fourth arrest in three years at the school.
The resolution of these issues, and many others, promise to shape the coverage of college sports this year and beyond. Stay tuned.
Rulings in Derrick Rose’s Civil Sexual Assault Case are Coming
On Friday, a California federal court heard oral argument on Derrick Rose’s motion seeking to compel his sexual assault accuser to undergo a mental examination (PDF of the Motion). Rose argues, while denying the allegations, that because his accuser claims to have suffered severe emotional distress, including depression, that he is entitled to have an independent medical examiner meet with her to determine the severity of the emotional distress. The court handed out a “tentative ruling” (the contents of which are unknown) at oral argument on Friday and has typically ruled quickly on similar issues in this lawsuit. The court also heard arguments on Rose’s motion to exclude one of Plaintiff’s medical experts. Expect to see a ruling on these motions sometime this week.