O”Bannon v. NCAA
Petition for certiorari denied on October 3, 2016
Linked with:
Issue: (1) Whether, in determining an appropriate remedy for a violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act under the "Rule of Reason," a court may treat the restraint itself " here, the agreement among the NCAA and its members prohibiting college athlete compensation, or what the NCAA calls "amateurism" " as a legitimate procompetitive effect: and (2) whether, after finding a violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act under the Rule of Reason, a court is restricted to awarding relief that the plaintiff proves is "virtually as effective" as the restraint in serving its alleged purposes, "without significantly increased cost."
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Justices issue additional orders from September 26 conference (Update) (Amy Howe, October 3, 2016)
Date | Proceedings and Orders |
---|---|
03/14/2016 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 18, 2016) |
04/13/2016 | Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 18, 2016. |
05/13/2016 | Brief of respondent National Collegiate Athletic Association in opposition filed. |
05/26/2016 | Reply of petitioner Edward C. O'Bannon, Jr., Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated filed. (Distributed) |
05/31/2016 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 16, 2016. |
06/06/2016 | Rescheduled. |
07/20/2016 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 26, 2016. |
10/03/2016 | Petition DENIED. |