Judge certifies classes in NCAA NIL lawsuit

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Update:

• A federal judge in California certified three classes in a lawsuit against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) over Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) restrictions and how they prohibit athletes from benefiting from third-party contracts where the schools make money off of athletes’ NIL.
• The classes include a men’s basketball and football class, a women’s basketball class and a class including other sports.
• U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken named Tymir Oliver, a former University of Illinois football player, the class representative for football and men’s basketball; Sedona Prince, a University of Oregon women’s basketball player, as the representative for women’s basketball; and Grant House of Arizona State University men’s swimming and diving team as the representative for other sports. 

NCAA NIL restrictions class action lawsuit overview: 

• Who: A group of NCAA athletes asked a California federal judge to certify several classes of athletes in their complaint against the organization. 
• Why: The athletes seek to end the NCAA’s restrictions on their ability to profit off of their name, image and likeness while in school. 
• Where: The class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.

(Oct. 27, 2022)

A group of NCAA athletes requested multiple class certifications for their complaint challenging the association’s name, image and likeness (NIL) restrictions. 

“Defendants have collectively agreed to not share revenues with college athletes to compensate them for using their NILs to obtain immensely lucrative broadcast deals,” the NCAA class action states. 

The NCAA athletes argue that their claims would best be resolved on a classwide basis while asking a California federal judge to certify classes separately consisting of NCAA Division I basketball, football and other athletes. 

The plaintiffs also seek class certification for all college athletes who will or have competed on any NCAA Division I athletic team since June 15, 2020.

“The challenged NIL restraints apply uniformly to all members of the proposed classes,” the NCAA class action states. 

NCAA class action claims NIL restrictions prevent top-performing athletes from profiting off publicity

The plaintiffs filed the consolidated complaint against the NCAA, which followed other complaints, in July 2021 and sought to end the organization’s NIL rules for its college athletes, Law360 reports. 

The NCAA athletes argue that the NIL restrictions prevent top-performing college athletes from profiting off of the publicity they have as top athletes while attending school. 

The NCAA suspended the majority of its NIL restrictions in July 2021 after some states passed new laws that would allow college athletes to profit off of their NIL in spite of NCAA rules stating otherwise, Law360 reports. 

Have you been prevented from profiting off of your name, image or likeness? Let us know in the comments! 

The plaintiffs are represented by Steve W. Berman, Emilee Sisco, Stephanie Verdoia and Benjamin Jacob Siegel of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP; Jeffrey L. Kessler, Jeanifer Ellen Parsigian, David L. Greenspan, Adam I. Dale and David G. Feher of Winston & Strawn LLP; and Jeffrey L. Kodroff of Spector Roseman & Kodroff PC.

The NCAA NIL restrictions class action lawsuit is In re: College Athlete NIL Litigation, Case No. 4:20-cv-03919, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• NFL seeks arbitration in Flores lawsuit despite Gruden ruling
• Overtime Sports class action alleges website violates civil rights of visually impaired people
• Chicago Cubs lawsuit alleges Wrigley Field does not have enough wheelchair-accessible seats
• NCAA claims student athletes misconstrue Supreme Court pay decision