Judge Orders NCAA To Show It Is Not In Contempt In Oliver Case

By Liz Mullen, Staff Writer, SportsBusiness Journal

Ohio Judge Has Found Cause To Believe NCAA In Contempt In Andy Oliver Case

An Ohio judge has ordered the NCAA to show cause to why it is not in contempt of court for violating the court’s order declaring void an NCAA regulation prohibiting college baseball players from having their lawyer present during negotiations with MLB clubs. Erie County (OH) Judge Tygh Tone found "probable cause to believe that defendant NCAA is in indirect civil and criminal contempt" of a February court order in a case involving Oklahoma State Univ. P and expected first-round MLB Draft prospect Andy Oliver. In that order, Tone found NCAA Bylaw 12.3.2.1 to be “arbitrary and capricious.” Tone issued yesterday’s order after the NCAA Monday issued a memo to draft-eligible baseball players, outlining the NCAA rules regarding players hiring an agent or advisor for the June Amateur Draft. Tone ordered the NCAA to produce in person the author or authors of that memo, as well as other evidence related to its alleged non compliance with his February court order and his August ‘08 temporary restraining order. The NCAA did not immediately respond to an e-mail seeking comment. “The NCAA is telling all these kids, essentially they can’t have lawyers negotiate for them, which is exactly what the judge ruled invalid back in February,” said Rick Johnson, attorney for Oliver, who filed a motion asking that the NCAA be held in contempt of court. “So essentially the NCAA is thumbing their nose at the judge.”

NCAA RESPONSE: The NCAA last night responded to the order in a statement that reads, "The NCAA has deep respect for the integrity of all court orders. We have obeyed and will continue to obey all court orders issued relative to this case. The NCAA has an obligation to keep its members informed. The NCAA also works to provide information to prospective student-athletes, current student-athletes and the public. We’ve been very careful in providing that information so as not to violate the court order or authority. We also were careful to alert institutions and student-athletes that the original order was issued and of our intention to comply. We were particularly surprised to hear of this contempt order in view of the fact that the court issued a different order May 6th denying the contempt motion and saying we were in compliance, which we just learned about from the court this morning."