Sports Agent and Sports Lawyer Blog

In January, we blogged about a swim coach discrimination sports lawsuit at Lock Haven University.

Former Lock Haven University swim coach George Garlick filed a sex discrimination lawsuit, alleging a hostile workplace environment which led to his dismissal in 2005. According to this article, Garlick was a successful coach who turned around the men’s and women’s teams from perennial cellar-dwellers to top-ranked programs.

Recently USA Today picked up on the fact that seven lawsuits have been brought in recent years against the Lock Haven athletic department. What is unique about this situation is that it can be classified as a reverse-discrimination situation because of the allegations that the women’s teams are better supported than the men’s teams. Here is a rundown:

Taylor filed a defamation suit against five men affiliated with a community group called Preserving the Legacy of Wrestling (PLOW) plus the general manager of a sports radio station. (Taylor argues she is not a public figure because athletics directors at state schools in the Pennsylvania State Athletic Conference are faculty members who do not make personnel decisions or supervise coaches, who are members of the same union.)

•Wilson filed a federal civil rights suit against LHU and Taylor alleging he is held to more stringent job requirements than other coaches because he is black.

•George Garlick, former women's swimming coach whose contract was not renewed, filed suit against LHU alleging Taylor favors women over men for coaching positions. (He was replaced by a man. LHU has eight head coaches who are men and five who are women; some coach more than one sport.)

•Wrestler Landis Wright filed suit against Taylor and others alleging he was forced off the team and lost his scholarship because of negligent supervision and retaliation.

•LHU paid Rudy $200,000 to settle a suit in which she contended female coaches were paid less then their male counterparts in the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education.

•Guerriero got a settlement of $47,500 after filing suit alleging he was moved from a job as assistant athletics director for speaking out against what he charged was a sexually hostile work environment.

•Guerriero won $60,000 in compensatory damages in a federal civil rights retaliation lawsuit. He said he was unfairly removed from a sports marketing job (in development, not athletics) that was part of his original settlement. He is a full-time faculty member with tenure.

When you put on a helmet and step on the field there is an idea that it is supposed to provide you with some measure of protection. Why else would they be required? I am sure that’s what Jordan Wolf thought when he walked up to what would turn out to be his final at-bat.

Wolf, a member of the 2008 Baltimore Orioles' Class-A farm team, was hit in the head with a 93-mph fastball. The impact resulted in a skull fracture stretching from his ear to the top of his head. Wolf lost all feeling on the right side of his body and his ability to speak due to a brain hemorrhage. Two years later the 25 year-old has been diagnosed with epilepsy and suffers from multiple seizures.

Wolf is now suing Rawlings, the helmet manufacturer, and the MLB for failing to provide him with adequate protection. Not surprisingly, lawsuits against helmet manufactures have been around for years. In one case, a 14 year-old boy was rendered quadriplegic when a teammate struck him on top of his helmet during a high school football game. The helmet company, Athletic Helmets, lost this $12 million lawsuit. Here the court found that Athletic Helmets’ warnings and instructions for use were inadequate, not that the helmet was defectively designed.

Are these injuries just a risk of the game, or will Wolf be successful in proving that Rawlings and/or the MLB should have know his helmet was inadequate? New helmet designs make it obvious that proper helmet protection is important to prevent serious injuries. Rawlings, the official MLB equipment supplier, has since changed their helmet designs and introduced one that can withstand a pitch up to 100mph. Also the NFL recently introduced a new helmet design to provide their players with more protection from serious injury. This might be a sign that these companies and organizations knew their old designs were inadequate.

We have seen it before – a prominent sports agent leaves his company and takes some of his star clients with him. One of the most prominent examples recently is Dan Lozano, who left BEST, and took his top clients including Albert Pujols. Lozano did not end up in litigation, but sometimes the agent and his former employer end up mired in a lawsuit. For instance, Matthew Baldwin is a prominent sports agent who left a firm and then ended up in court against his former employer.

In England, star soccer player Wayne Rooney apparently became mixed up in a lawsuit when his former agent left his firm.

Sports management firm Proactive sued him saying he owed them commission on a number of lucrative deals. Proactive's former agent, Paul Stretford, took Rooney with him when he left the firm in acrimony in 2008.

Despite Proactive claiming he should have paid them 20% commission on his multi-million pound deals because the contract had not been properly terminated, Judge Brendan Hegarty QC ruled in the footballer's favour.

It appears to me that Rooney may have benefited from what may be termed a loophole insofar as the actual agent-player contract itself was ruled to be invalid. Therefore, Rooney was lucky. Had the contract been valid and Rooney chosen not to pay the agency which negotiated his commission, the result likely would have differed.

What is your first reaction when you hear that the father of a youth baseball player has sued a coach because his son was hit by a pitch?

First you think about how our society is too litigious and parents need to take a deep breath and let kids be kids, right? In this instance, however, the facts bear closer scrutiny.

According to the article, a coach on one team instructed his player to purposefully throw at a player on the opposing team. The batter allegedly broke two bones in his left hand as a result. Now the lawsuit seeks compensation for medical expenses and pain and suffering.

So what’s wrong with this picture? If the facts as depicted are true, then the hit batter has every right to recourse against the coach. Coaches have a high level of responsibility to the safety of not just their own players but to all players in the league. It is good sportsmanship.

It is also illegal to order a kid to hurt another kid. Think about it for a second. If there wasn’t a baseball game going on, do you think a parent would be held accountable for telling his kid to throw a ball at another kid? Of course. That would be potential criminal and civil battery. Therefore a coach should be held accountable if he ordered a player to try and injure another player in a game.

The NFL Players Association (NFLPA) has previously been to court regarding the use of players names and statistics on online fantasy football leagues. Last year in a case with CBS Interactive, the court concluded that the use of this information is protected under the First Amendment. This meant that the players names and statistics were seen as publicly available information and CBS could use this player information without paying a fee. The NFLPA is now appealing.

CBS is not the NFLPA’s only nightmare. Yahoo! recently alleged that the NFLPA has threatened to sue them if they continue to use players stats and other related information without paying proper royalties. The two parties had a licensing agreement regarding this issue, but when that ended in March of this year, Yahoo! now believes they should not have to continue to pay for this information. However only a month after the lawsuit was filed in a Minnesota court, the parties have apparently agreed to settle. The details of this settlement were not made public.

This type of action brings in the question of what should players be compensated for. They are essentially a brand. They add value to their teams and to items they are associated with. Athletes perform on the field and people off the field are making money selling their brand. Take Oakland A’s pitcher, Dallas Braden for example. Soon after Braden’s encounter with A-Rod where yelled at him for crossing over his mound, souvenir stands began selling “Get Off My Mound” T-shirts. The A’s marketing department went to get the shirt approved by the MLBPA, but it was rejected. Thus to get around this they redesigned the shirt so it does not have Braden’s name on it, although it does have a silhouette of him throwing a pitch. It is obvious they are making money off of Braden’s actions, but is something wrong with this picture if Braden is also not earning anything?

As an athlete you are not always aware of when and how and when your brand is being used for profit. You work hard to prove yourself on and off the field and others should not be taking advantage of your success. This is why it is important to have an agent to look out for you. Your agent can and should make sure your brand is protected. They are familiar with the law and know what you are entitled to.

Thousands of children are home-schooled in every state, but does that mean they should be ban from participating in public school athletics? Louisiana recently passed a law allowing it this type of participation, but there is still some debate among superintendents on what effects this new law will have on the upcoming school year.

The law says any home-schooled student who is allowed on a high school team must live in that school's attendance zone, fulfill the same academic and physical requirements of other student-athletes and can be kicked off teams, as any other student. The law says parents must provide insurance and cannot sue if a school rejects or dismisses a home-schooled student from playing sports.

Apparently, Louisiana officials are uncertain about the ramifications. Suffice it to say, the issues will play themselves out over the coming school year and beyond. The bottom line is that this is probably good news for kids who are home schooled. It also means that those kids - and their parents, of course - need to ensure that they comply with the eligibility requirements as defined by the law.

Probably two of the most famous athletes that have come from home-schooling backgrounds are football stars, Tim Tebow and Jason Taylor. Grown up in Pennsylvania Taylor was allowed to play at his local high school, while Tebow, a Florida resident, was also allowed to play in high school and became the first home-schooled athlete to be nominated for the Heisman Trophy.

Since 1996, Florida legislation has allowed home-schooled students to participate in athletics at schools within the districts they live. Tebow's success has also inspired citizens of other states to propose legislation allowing equal access for home-schooled children. A few states, such as Alabama, have even named this proposed legislation the "Tim Tebow Bill."

Currently about 24 states allow equal access to home-schooled children, and each state involves different eligibility requirements. If your children are home-schooled and looking to participate in public school extracurricular activities it would be wise to consult a sports lawyer to be sure you comply with your states requirements.

With the Major League Baseball All-Star Break upon us, now may be a good time for any unsigned prospects who were selected in last month’s draft to re-evaluate their options.

If you did not sign, you are probably either (a) leaning heavily toward going to college if you are a high school player, or back to college if you are a junior college player or (b) waiting for others in the top rounds to sign so that you can sign for something over the MLB recommended slot. Some players may be in another state of mind entirely, however. They may be wishing they could sign, but they are being low-balled by the team that drafted them.

Remember, you have just over one month to sign. The deadline is 11:59 p.m. on August 15, 2010. If you have not yet signed, it may be time to consult an adviser and see if the adviser can assist you. Up until now the team has probably been negotiating with your family. If you have not yet signed, it is probably time to be honest and realize that these negotiations have been unsuccessful. Even if you are fine with an outcome that results in you going back to school instead of launching your professional baseball career, don’t you think you should at least let an adviser try to see if he can assist you in working out a better deal?

For this blog’s earlier analysis on the MLB draft and a breakdown of the bonus structure, see these links here and here and here. Remember that fewer than 10 percent of players who are drafted will make the major leagues. This means that the payday you might be about to receive from the team that drafted you could be the largest single paycheck of your entire life. Don't you owe it to yourself to let an adviser see if he can help you?

Every year parents of youth sports athletes sign waivers of liability that are required before the first practice. It happens millions of times a year all over the United States. If the parent has ever reviewed the details of the waiver, they all seem the same: They protect the team or league and all of its employees, including volunteer coaches, against liability.

A shocking development out of Michigan has threatened to turn this standard procedure completely on its head. According to the Michigan Supreme Court these waivers are not. In a recent case, Woodman v. Kera, the court held under Michigan law that waiver-of-liability forms signed by parents on behalf of minors are unenforceable.

Key to the court’s decision was the holding that under the common law in Michigan a minor lacks the capacity to enter into a pre-injury waiver, and that the minor’s parents also lack the legal capacity to bind their child to such contract.

This decision may be overturned quickly by the state legislature, which has the authority to make such waivers enforceable. Imagine the ramifications of the youth sports waivers not being enforceable in a court of law. No one would coach or organize youth sports and insurance premiums would skyrocket.

The decision in the Woodman case is contrary to that of many other Midwest States. Here in Florida decisions on this issues have not been very consistent. In a 2004 case, Gonzalez v. City of Coral Gables, the Third District barred a mother's claim on behalf of a minor child when he got hurt at camp. This was based on the fact that she had signed a pre-injury release form before his participation.

Similarly in 2007 the same court found a parents’ execution of a pre-injury release enforceable for participation on the high school cheerleading squad. However the appellate court held that pre-injury releases are unenforceable as against public policy. The court stated that its decision was limited to commercial enterprises because, "they can insure against the risk of loss and include these costs in the price of participation."

It remains to be seen whether Michigan’s outcome will affect Florida youth sports law and whether the entire landscape of the youth sports scene will change. If you are a parent or coach and have questions about a waiver’s legal precedent or whether a lawsuit can still occur despite a waiver of liability, consult a sports attorney.

To say that Walter Dix is back is like saying it gets warm in the summer time here in Florida.

Dix, who runs this weekend (July 10) in the Aviva British Grand Prix on July 10 in Gateshead, England, beat Tyson Gay in the 200 last weekend at the Prefontaine Classic in Eugene, Oregon.

For video of Dix’s unbelievable race, click here.

Dix finished in 19.72 seconds, .04 ahead of Gay and .04 behind Dix’s personal best.

“I wasn’t really focused on the time,” Dix, who won Olympic bronze medals in the 100m and 200m in 2008, said. “It was a great race and I’m glad I got that competition against Tyson. Tyson was the fastest man in America last year and I’m glad I could take that title away from him this year.”

If you are a professional athlete, your sports agent works for you. That means you can fire them if they don't meet your needs. Your agent, or lack of an agent, should not be a reason you miss out on opportunities to expand your career as a professional athlete. Agents communicate with teams, coaches, managers, along with negotiate contracts and establish endorsement deals all to promote your career. It is not enough to just get you on a team; agents must keep new opportunities coming for their athletes. There are thousands of possible sports agents out there, its important to find one willing to work hard to enhance your career.

Even agents who work for high profile athletes run the risk of losing them to other agencies. This was the case for IMG's Mark Ervin who represented snowboarding prodigy Shaun White. White is among the wealthiest, most successful and highest profile Olympic athletes outside of the mainstream sports. Despite his high profile and successful endorsement and sponsorship agreements, White apparently remained unsatisfied with his lack of opportunities following White's gold-medal performance in the Vancouver Olympics. Thus White recently left Ervin, to sign with CAA.

Although Ervin and IMG will still receive commissions on the endorsement deals they did close for White, they will now miss out on future opportunities. Losing a client like White is a huge loss. It has been said that White has a reputation for being very selective regarding endorsement deals (if you read his bio on his web site, it says he only partners "with companies he thinks are cool"), and we do not know the true details behind the reason for White switching agents. It is possible that he has unrealistic expectations in that the economy remains in the tank, he already has numerous endorsements and it may not be the former agent’s fault that White procured no new deals since his Olympic performance. Nevertheless, this is a lesson for all athletes (and their sports agents) which is that if you are unhappy with your agent, it may be time for a change.

Athletes who start foundations must pay careful attention to their foundation's efforts. Many successful professional athletes have started their own charitable foundations. Derek Jeter, for example, began the Turn 2 Foundation to help children and teenagers avoid drug and alcohol use along with rewarding those with high academic achievements. Others such as Dwayne Wade, who founded Wade's World, and Peyton Manning, who started PeyBack, also use these foundations to give back and promote successful futures to the youth in their communities and across the country.

Although these are examples of successful foundations, some athletes have had trouble managing their own foundations. This became the problem for former Chicago Bear Chris Zorich.

Zorich founded his charity in 1993, and received numerous accolades and awards throughout the years for helping disadvantage children. His charity included toy drives during Christmas, providing dinners on Thanksgiving, and making regular hospital visits. But in 2002 things started to go downhill for the Chris Zorich Charitable Foundation.

In April the Internal Revenue Service filed a $10,000 lien against the charity. And the Illinois attorney general's office, which canceled the charity's registration six years ago, said it was trying to reach Zorich regarding the charity's operations after the Tribune asked about its status.
The foundation reported $864,645 in assets on its 2002 tax return, apparently the last one filed. Zorich said he forgot about the money and assumes it's still there. When the Tribune asked to see a bank statement listing the funds, Zorich responded that he did not have one available.

Zorich, who retired from the NFL and now works in the University of Notre Dame's athletic office, said the charity closed in 2008 and last accepted donations around 2005. He said he was surprised to hear that http://www.chriszorich.org lists an address to mail donations.

Zorich stated he was aware the registration was canceled in 2002, but assumed his cousin Barbara Singer, the foundation's executive director, had handled the matter. When Singer was diagnosed with cancer, Zorich failed to bring in additional employees to help run the foundation.. His reason for this seemed reasonable on a personal level: He didn't want Singer to feel like she was losing control of everything in her life. Later when Singer passed away Zorich had approximately $800,000 in the foundation’s bank account that needed to be distributed, but he failed to do so. He claimed he would hire an accounting firm to help, but has yet to hear back from them. Failing to file an annual return for three consecutive years can cost a tax-exempt organization to lose their status and become subject to penalties. As of now the IRS still considers the Zorich charity tax-exempt.

It seems that Zorich didn't understand how much work actually goes into running a successful charity. He should have hired other employees to help manage the it as soon as the charity stopped being one of his top priorities. Additional help was especially needed when his executive director became ill. When you are sitting on undistributed documents worth around $800,000, someone is bound to come looking for them. Charity foundations should not loose sight of what their charities were initially set up to do, help others.

As a professional athlete, your agent is supposed to protect you from the unsavory elements who always want a piece of you. But what happens if your agent is ripping you off? It’s every player’s worst nightmare.

A football player in Buffalo, Bills cornerback Terrence McGee, has agreed to a settlement in a lawsuit filed against his former agent. The lawsuit alleged McGee was bilked out of more than $1 million. The agent has also agreed to drop his lawsuit accusing McGee of defamation of character as part of this settlement.

In a lawsuit filed in Harris County District Court in Texas in February 2007, the player accused financial adviser Craig Curry of funneling McGee's money into unauthorized and possibly nonexistent investments. The money transfers were made shortly after McGee signed a contract extension with the Bills in a deal that included a $5 million bonus.

What is unusual about this lawsuit is that a Bills coach was also named in the action. Jerry Gray, the Bills defensive coordinator at the time, and the agent were accused of conspiring in the scheme along with having a personal economic interest by introducing McGee to Curry. McGee claimed that the agent and Gray knew of Curry's criminal past, thus making him unqualified to represent NFL Players. McGee feels they should have warned him of this.

This lawsuit offers a myriad of lessons for pro athletes. First, do not blindly trust everything that your agent says or does; sometimes it’s wise to have an attorney keeping an eye on the agent. Second, always be judicious as to where you invest your money. NFLPA financial advisers are required to be licensed by the union, and they also prohibit convicted felons from representing players. Not all sports maintain such stringent requirements for their financial advisers. That’s why it is up to the player – or his legal adviser – to vet anyone who is managing a player’s money.