{"title":"Track path of NCAA settlement developments","authors":"Robert J. Romano J.D., LL.M.","doi":"10.1002/catl.31383","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The parties involved in the various NCAA antitrust cases were sent back to the negotiations table by U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken in September of this year to revise the language of the proposed billion dollar agreement before it could be finalized and made an order of the court. (The antitrust matters involved <i>House v. NCAA</i> (No. 4:20-cv-03919, N.D. Ca. 06/15/2020), <i>Carter v. NCAA</i> (No. 4;23-cv-06325), and <i>Hubbard v. NCAA</i> (No. 4:23-cv-01593).) One of the judge's primary concerns involved the wording wherein boosters would only provide money to student-athletes for what was referred to as a “valid business purpose.”</p>","PeriodicalId":100289,"journal":{"name":"College Athletics and the Law","volume":"21 8","pages":"3-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"College Athletics and the Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/catl.31383","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The parties involved in the various NCAA antitrust cases were sent back to the negotiations table by U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken in September of this year to revise the language of the proposed billion dollar agreement before it could be finalized and made an order of the court. (The antitrust matters involved House v. NCAA (No. 4:20-cv-03919, N.D. Ca. 06/15/2020), Carter v. NCAA (No. 4;23-cv-06325), and Hubbard v. NCAA (No. 4:23-cv-01593).) One of the judge's primary concerns involved the wording wherein boosters would only provide money to student-athletes for what was referred to as a “valid business purpose.”