Around the Big Ten

[Jeff Buchanan]

Apparently UM has been granted the TRO.

I can't find confirmation of that. All I'm seeing are "reports." I'm skeptical.

It's possible that the TRO was granted ex parte or with respect to or in the interests of one side only or of an interested outside party. Also unconfirmed.

Already mentioned but there's a question of the Michigan court's (or any state court) jurisdiction. That's why the BIG has allegedly requested the case be moved to a Federal Court.

I read "Eleven Warriors" where there is a post that provides osu's legal analysis. It's pretty solid. The language suggests a bias - no surprise.

Good article in the Athletic but it's pay walled. This, in part, provides some insight into obstacles M's lawyers have to overcome:

In order for Michigan and Jim Harbaugh to be granted the temporary restraining order, they are required to demonstrate that immediate and irreparable harm will occur if the court doesn’t, essentially, hit the pause button on the Big Ten’s proposed punishment.

In arguing that irreparable harm is being suffered by the University, the attorneys note not only that the student-athletes of Michigan’s football team would be affected, but that Michigan “prides itself on fairness and integrity,” and that without injunctive relief the University athletics programs will suffer significant injury to its reputation.

Likewise, the brief argues that “no more dramatic blow could be given to [Coach Jim Harbaugh’s] character and reputation that the permanent lifetime label of “missing in action” because of a purported— but still unsubstantiated— cheating scandal.”

Finally, the brief also states that an injunction against the Big Ten is in the public interest, as Michigan is a contender for a national title and “fans have a vested interest in seeing the most deserving team win the title.” — Briley

My understanding is that M's arguments against punishment were framed as procedural and, IMO, there was plenty there to argue. Anticipating they'd lose that argument the BIG pulled a switcharoo here. By , in their mind, punishing the U, not Harbaugh, the BIG sidesteps the due process and procedural arguments M would advance. Petitti claims he has the authority to issue the sanctions granted in the BIG's bylaws and handbook. IMO, that's weak sauce.

[Jeff Buchanan]

More from the Atlantic:

The framing of Harbaugh’s suspension as a sanction of the University of Michigan’s football program, rather than a punishment of Harbaugh himself, is a clever move by the conference to try and preemptively counter possible legal attacks.

If the Big Ten was punishing Harbaugh, then Harbaugh’s culpability in the scheme of Stalions (who, interestingly, is not referred to by name in the letter) might be framed as a material fact that is under dispute, something that would require a fact-finder’s determination in a court of law (and so slow up the process).

Instead, the conference is relying on pieces of evidence collected from a variety of sources. Some come from the NCAA and other universities in the Big Ten. Some come from publicly available materials including pictures, videos and Venmo receipts. The Big Ten even cited Greg Sankey, the SEC commissioner, for confirming that Stalions had bought tickets to its conference championship game.

The Big Ten ties many of these elements back to what it refers to as a “Master Spreadsheet” listing out the various games, tickets and attendees that Stalions arranged access to, noting that these items corroborate one another. Pettiti, in the letter, claims that the mass of information led him to determine that the existence of the scheme is “uncontroverted.” Further, the letter confirms that Michigan was aware of pieces of this evidence.

In other words, the conference seems to be trying to lay a firm foundation of fact, and eliminate as many questions as possible — including the question of Harbaugh’s knowledge — in preparation for an impending slog of motion practice.

I'm not sure the BIG's argument to sanction the U instead of Harbaugh thereby avoiding process issues actually does that. There are, to me, still questions about imposing penalties without allowing the U to see the evidence and provide explanations or mitigation. That answer to that question is going to come down a careful reading ot what powers Petitti actually has granted to him.

[Jeff Buchanan]

I

t's possible that the TRO (could be) granted ex parte or with respect to or in the interests of one side only or of an interested outside party. Also unconfirmed.

It will be ......A motion was filed. The filing document was posted at mgoboard. We'll hear something well before game time. I can't imagine the TRO won't be granted by the MI court because of the short time frame (hours) the relief is being sought.

A TRO expires in 14d, During the period after the issuance of a TRO the claimant (M) will present oral arguments and the defendant (the BIG) will present their's before the judge. I'm not as certain as talent seems to be that M ill lose here. They certainly have winnable process arguments and I don't know the details of what powers Pititti is granted by the BIG's rules.

[iam416]

The State of Michigan doesn’t have personal jurisdiction over the B10. Further, any temporary order is limited to the state of M — you can’t do what you’re trying to do — IN MICHIGAN.

Federal Court is 100% where this case should be. But if you need a quick TRO that doesn’t extend beyond M, then Washtenaw is where you file.

[iam416]

As has been obvious from the onset this is entirely about 2023. The regression to the mean is coming and so is really hard punishments.

[iam416]

Finaly, if this were something that really mattered to my client, I'd advise them to tell the state court to fuck off -- I'm not going to stop doing this shit in Illinois or Pennsylvania or Maryland or wherever. If you want to try to enforce an ex parte order from Court with no jurisdiction over my client telling my client you can't do shit outside of the court's jurisdiction, then you go try and enforce it in Federal Court and we'll see how that goes. I'd win that 100% of the time. 100%.

But, M is fighting the publicity battle. So, for their purposes -- ANY ol' TRO will do -- fuck, man -- Guam could issue it and they wouldn't care. All they need to say is "TRO!" and then they get the publicity angle they want. And the B10 has to factor that in.

[Jeff Buchanan]

I'm reading that in the case where the two parties reside in different states, diversity jurisdiction can apply. In this case we have the U in MI and the BIG is in IL I think it is the plaintiff that decides where he wants to file - state or federal. I suppose the BIG can file a motion to hear the case in federal court but, man, this complaint probably would not clear the bar for being heard in a federal court. But, I'm getting out in front of my skis here.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Angelique is reporting no TRO today. The potentially most accurate explanation I've seen is the TRO was denied because the U's lawyers didn't convince the judge the sanctions would cause irreparable damage.

It's also being reported that a hearing is scheduled for the 17th. That makes sense and is consistent with the view that the court believes it has jurisdiction and will hear the arguments of both sides.. That doesn't mean the B10 can't move for a federal court next week.

There's nashing of teeth among M fans but this is of little interest among fans of other teams. Its of outsized importance for us.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Michigan issued a statement;

“We look forward to presenting our case next week where we intend to demonstrate that the Big Ten has not acted legally or fairly.”

Michigan plays Penn State at noon today. Michigan will play Maryland Saturday, November 18. No game time has been announced."

There's been considerable misrepresentation by the press of what probably happened after the application for a TRO was filed at the Trial Court of Washtenaw County. That's because of the language that's being used by reporters. The TRO was probably denied for reasons that likely involve failure to convince the judge of irreparable harm or one of the other obstacles that M had to overcome for the TRO to be issued.

At some point early next week we'll see the judge's ruling in print. It will appear at the Trial Court of Washtenaw County's web site. She'll explain her reasoning for denying the TRO. Until then, you can just ignore all the speculation

[iam416]

As a lawyer -- if your hearing for TRO is bounced a week, you've lost your TRO.

[WingsFan]

Take the TRO and stick where the ....well you know. lol

[Mike]

He’s not coaching the next two games. But if we beat OSU, Tony Tinydick will hand the Big Ten Championship Trophy to Jim Harbaugh on national TV and it will be glorious.

[WingsFan]

You never know, I read the decision is Friday. But I know nothing on these matters -- Just soaking up beating Franklin in his house!

[iam416]

Lol at Mike — “if [M] beats OSU”

LMMFAO. You’re so kind. There’s zero fucking way that’s not happening. It’s ok to say it.

[Cody_Russell]

But M doesn’t have the CS cheat codes anymore. Obviously they’re a different team due to that reason… 🤨

…

This Rutgers vs Iowa game turned out to be fascinating.
All this chatter all week about the O/U and yet it’s looking like it’s WAY under. Barring a crazy 4th quarter.

I haven’t really watched much of this game, but still interesting to follow the score.