I was listening to @Neal McCready and @tsiskey discuss this on their pod on the way to work this morning and it had me curious exactly what was going on here. To be totally candid, Tyler's comment about the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit being "slappy court" in "some random down" got my lawyer nerd brain firing on all cylinders so here's the deal.
First, brief explanation of the Federal court system. Most cases start out in the United States District Court for the district where the genesis of the lawsuit happened. There are exceptions to that but that's generally the case. Each state has one or more Federal judicial districts and each has its own District Court with judges who are appointed by the President for life. If someone doesn't like a decision by the District Court, the can appeal to the Circuit Court. There are 13 Circuits, each covering a geographic area. For example, Mississippi is in the 5th Circuit which covers Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas. So any appeal from the District Court in any of those states goes to the 5th Circuit. This case is in the 3rd Circuit, which covers Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware. Circuit Court judges are also appointed by the President for life. If you don't like the Circuit Court's decision, you can request that the U.S. Supreme Court hear your case.
Each court's decisions are only binding in their jurisdiction. So obviously, the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions are binding for the whole country. A Circuit Court's decisions are binding in their Circuit, and a District Court's decision is binding in their District.
So what is happening here? In 2019, 14 student-athletes filed suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against the NCAA and 32 member schools seeking what's called declaratory judgment, which is where you ask the court to make a determination on a particular legal question, that NCAA bylaws violate the Fair Labor Standards Act and certain Pennsylvania state labor laws as well as monetary damages for those violations.
In response, the defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure which is basically saying "you can't sue me for that." The more specific meaning of as 12(b)(6) motion is that even if you assume all the facts alleged in the plaintiff's lawsuit are true, the defendant still wins. That motion was heard by the District Court and denied. Had the District Court granted the motion, the case would have been over. Denying the motion doesn't mean the athletes won the case, just that it will be allowed to move forward into the discovery phase and potentially to trial later. The defendants then filed what's called an interlocutory appeal which is an appeal of the trial court's decision in the middle of the case rather than once the case is completely over asking the 3rd Circuit to overturn the District Court's decision to deny the Motion to Dismiss.
So what is the "big news" that came out last week? You're not always entitled to an appeal. There are certain issues where you get an appeal as a right. Others the appellate court has to decide to hear your case. When the defendants filed their appeal, the plaintiffs got a chance to tell the 3rd Circuit why they don't need to hear the case. On February 8, the 3rd Circuit decided they will hear the interlocutory appeal. I can't see anything where they've set briefing timelines or a date for oral arguments yet.
Why is this important? The fact that the 3rd Circuit is going to hear the case isn't really surprising given the U.S. Supreme Court's expression of its interest in hearing these types of cases. What is a big deal is their ruling. If they rule in favor of the athletes, no big deal. The case goes back to the trial court and proceeds. If they rule in favor of the NCAA and the schools, it creates a circuit split where multiple circuits have ruled in different ways on the same issue and it would almost certainly be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court at that point.
So there's your super nerdy law lesson for today. Ultimately, Tyler was right and an article implying this is the end all be all about this issue is a little click-baity but it's certainly not a nothing burger either.
First, brief explanation of the Federal court system. Most cases start out in the United States District Court for the district where the genesis of the lawsuit happened. There are exceptions to that but that's generally the case. Each state has one or more Federal judicial districts and each has its own District Court with judges who are appointed by the President for life. If someone doesn't like a decision by the District Court, the can appeal to the Circuit Court. There are 13 Circuits, each covering a geographic area. For example, Mississippi is in the 5th Circuit which covers Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas. So any appeal from the District Court in any of those states goes to the 5th Circuit. This case is in the 3rd Circuit, which covers Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware. Circuit Court judges are also appointed by the President for life. If you don't like the Circuit Court's decision, you can request that the U.S. Supreme Court hear your case.
Each court's decisions are only binding in their jurisdiction. So obviously, the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions are binding for the whole country. A Circuit Court's decisions are binding in their Circuit, and a District Court's decision is binding in their District.
So what is happening here? In 2019, 14 student-athletes filed suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against the NCAA and 32 member schools seeking what's called declaratory judgment, which is where you ask the court to make a determination on a particular legal question, that NCAA bylaws violate the Fair Labor Standards Act and certain Pennsylvania state labor laws as well as monetary damages for those violations.
In response, the defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure which is basically saying "you can't sue me for that." The more specific meaning of as 12(b)(6) motion is that even if you assume all the facts alleged in the plaintiff's lawsuit are true, the defendant still wins. That motion was heard by the District Court and denied. Had the District Court granted the motion, the case would have been over. Denying the motion doesn't mean the athletes won the case, just that it will be allowed to move forward into the discovery phase and potentially to trial later. The defendants then filed what's called an interlocutory appeal which is an appeal of the trial court's decision in the middle of the case rather than once the case is completely over asking the 3rd Circuit to overturn the District Court's decision to deny the Motion to Dismiss.
So what is the "big news" that came out last week? You're not always entitled to an appeal. There are certain issues where you get an appeal as a right. Others the appellate court has to decide to hear your case. When the defendants filed their appeal, the plaintiffs got a chance to tell the 3rd Circuit why they don't need to hear the case. On February 8, the 3rd Circuit decided they will hear the interlocutory appeal. I can't see anything where they've set briefing timelines or a date for oral arguments yet.
Why is this important? The fact that the 3rd Circuit is going to hear the case isn't really surprising given the U.S. Supreme Court's expression of its interest in hearing these types of cases. What is a big deal is their ruling. If they rule in favor of the athletes, no big deal. The case goes back to the trial court and proceeds. If they rule in favor of the NCAA and the schools, it creates a circuit split where multiple circuits have ruled in different ways on the same issue and it would almost certainly be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court at that point.
So there's your super nerdy law lesson for today. Ultimately, Tyler was right and an article implying this is the end all be all about this issue is a little click-baity but it's certainly not a nothing burger either.
