Concerned alumni amicus brief filed in Harbaugh v. Big Ten litigation

Submitted by rym on November 14th, 2023 at 7:30 PM

I am so grateful to the 1,700 University of Michigan alumni who entrusted Rushing McCarl LLP with the task of making their voices heard through our amicus brief in the Harbaugh v. Big Ten lawsuit. The Big Ten Conference's treatment of institutions we love has been inexcusable. Read the brief at https://rushingmccarl.com/michigan-alumni-amicus-brief/ .

Thank you to everyone on this board who helped in one way or another with this project.

Football
#SignGate

UMAmaizinBlue

November 14th, 2023 at 7:35 PM ^

Fantastic, thank you for putting this together! When (if ever) will we know if the court accepts the amicus brief for consideration? (I'm not a lawyer...farthest thing from it.)

Joined: 09/23/2009

MGoPoints: 36258

rym

November 15th, 2023 at 12:09 AM ^

The way we do it is to file the application for leave to file an amicus brief with the brief itself attached as an exhibit, so it will be part of the record once the clerk accepts the filing. It's like asking "May we file this" and handing the document to the judge. They already have it in front of them, so they may take a look at it out of curiosity alone — especially because amicus briefs are not common at the trial-court level, our brief is interesting, and it's a high-profile case that will have lots of media attention.

Once it's on the docket, there are a few possibilities: (1) The court could enter an order on the docket granting or denying the application for leave to file, probably without giving reasons one way or the other. (2) The court could rule on the application orally at the Friday hearing. Or (3) the court could completely ignore it, leaving us in the dark about whether it was considered.

It doesn't really matter. The brief is on the record and will shape the narrative, the more so the more it is amplified by those who appreciate its message.

Even if no one in the lawsuit mentions the brief again, the perspective shared in the brief is officially part of the conversation. That includes an MGoBoard-vetted, citation-backed explanation of SignGate that owes a heavy debt to Brian's "SignGate the Xth" series. The brief’s ideas will trickle in to various takes, creating toeholds for sanity.

Joined: 09/07/2019

MGoPoints: 1676

UcheWallyWally

November 14th, 2023 at 7:45 PM ^

Love and appreciate your work and dedication.  That said this may not be the most compelling defense imo.  I think Ghost of Fritz’s diary and your original post (presumably used by mars) are superior defenses.  
 

Still , who am I to judge. I’m no lawyer and have done nothing to help .  So again thank you for your contributions and effort

Joined: 08/24/2016

MGoPoints: 1687

YakAttack

November 14th, 2023 at 8:04 PM ^

Please read my comment below. In this instance, would being an alum hold more legal weight than the "average" fan? 

Alumnae would have more to, lose, obviously, if their institution loses any sort of credibility. But there are fans of this School/team that far, far outdate a vast majortity of graduates that are paying attention to this.

 

Joined: 01/20/2009

MGoPoints: 54336

goblu330

November 14th, 2023 at 9:45 PM ^

Not really.  An Amicus brief is often filed when a third party could have a right substantially impacted by a dispute between two other parties.  In that case, they actually do have traditional standing, it’s just that neither party to the action may know or be considering the issue from their perspective.  In this case, neither fans nor alumni could have brought an original action against the BIG, or at least not one that would not have been immediately dismissed.

Joined: 01/07/2022

MGoPoints: 32123

Arb lover

November 14th, 2023 at 9:48 PM ^

The main/leading quote that I agree with and which impacts all of us as alumni. As said not enough to file a claim on its own, but the court would be wise to consider it:

The alumni’s decision to attend the University of Michigan was influenced heavily by its distinguished reputation, and that reputation is now at risk. The commissioner’s unfair actions, which imply misconduct by the university and Coach Harbaugh despite no such finding, cast a shadow not only over the institution but also over all individuals associated with it, past and present, questioning their commitment to integrity and adherence to rules.

Joined: 11/26/2017

MGoPoints: 6915

HChiti76

November 15th, 2023 at 3:55 AM ^

You are incorrect. No standing is required or proof that they are a third party that could be affected by the decision. You’re getting confused with a party filing to intervene in a case where they weren’t an original party, but they will be directly affected by the court decision.

Amicus briefs are filed all the time by interest groups. For example, if the Michigan Supreme Court were to consider an issue regarding employment law issues, the Michigan Chamber of Commerce could retain a law firm and have them file an amicus brief. And the MAJ, a plaintiff trial attorney organization, could file a brief arguing for the rights of employees. Another prime example are the amicus briefs filed by right to life and pro-choice groups in Dobbs.

The court has complete discretion as to whether or not to consider this brief.  It could be ignored. It could be read and considered as part of the judge’s decision making, but never cited or mentioned in the oral or written decision. It could be cited and/or quoted in the decision. 

If I was still in private practice, I would have signed the brief. I also would have reviewed the brief and reached out to the attorneys if I had any suggestions as to form or content. However, since I am now an attorney in the state Attorney General’s office, I cannot just sign on to an outside brief. But, I will be strongly rooting for us on Friday morning. GO BLUE!!

Joined: 12/01/2014

MGoPoints: 2043

rym

November 14th, 2023 at 8:29 PM ^

Exactly. Michigan’s attorneys at Williams and Connelly did a great job and hit all the main points, so the purpose of the amicus brief was to help shape the media narrative, say things in a different way, make points that the university can’t necessarily make directly, and raise points that complement the university’s position.

Joined: 09/07/2019

MGoPoints: 1676

YakAttack

November 14th, 2023 at 7:57 PM ^

Thank you for for contribution. You will be forever in MGoBlog lore if this helps. I just have3 one question, and it has 0.00% to do with this filing. 

Is there anything non-alum can do? My first "favorite" Wolverine was Tony Boles. I cried, at age 13, when Kordell went Kordell.

I understand why we weren't included on this filing. But as "victim statements" maybe there's something there as the case proceeds? Collateral damage is a thing. And as a 30+ year fan, who turned down other opportunities to actually work for U of M, is there some say we can have?

I understand having only Alum sign this. But there are people allowed to sign this that never thought once about Ann Arbor until 5 years ago. Just a thought. Neg me back to WalMart if need be.

Joined: 01/20/2009

MGoPoints: 54336

YakAttack

November 14th, 2023 at 8:14 PM ^

Started Washtenaw at 29. Graduated with 2 Associates and a bunch of "Certifications." Got a job at U of M Inpatient Pharmacy.

Transferred to EMU. Hospital Administration. Took 2 epidemiology courses from a former State ID expert. Applied to U of M School of Public Health. Was told I'd be accepted, but ???

Then my life fell apart. I'm trying hard to get back to a place that I can fulfill that promise.

Joined: 01/20/2009

MGoPoints: 54336

rym

November 14th, 2023 at 8:09 PM ^

Thanks for the kind words. You can certainly help by amplifying the brief, because whether or not the court considers it, it can move the narrative in the right direction.

As for not being an alum, all Michigan fans are in the fold. I grew up rooting for Michigan and going to games with alumni and non-alumni alike. Since I went to UChicago for undergrad and law school, I almost missed out on being an alum despite being born in A2 and being a lifelong diehard fan; thankfully, I made time to spend a year in Ann Arbor getting a masters degree.

The only reason I had to keep the brief to alumni is that doing so allowed me to confirm through the Alumni Association that people who signed our form were real.

 

Joined: 09/07/2019

MGoPoints: 1676

WolverineGoneTerp

November 14th, 2023 at 8:14 PM ^

I'd like to thank rym for giving us the opportunity to feel like we're doing something.  Obviously, this is unlikely to weigh in the final decision, but it sure as hell feels good to at least know "we" had a chance to speak up and be heard.

Many, many thanks for the time you lavished on this project.  I, for one, appreciate it very much.

Joined: 11/24/2014

MGoPoints: 2519

Njia

November 14th, 2023 at 8:33 PM ^

A comment and then a question, Ryan:

- First, this is a very well-written brief. It’s readable by mere mortals and yet still has the footnote references that I would expect to see. Great job!

- Second, in your estimation, what is the risk of, on the one hand, arguing that the B1G cannot punish Harbaugh because the rules permit only punishing an institution, but then (pro)claiming that Harbaugh’s mere presence is essential to (and even a pillar of) the entire university community? Are we being too clever by half here?

Joined: 09/15/2009

MGoPoints: 35773

rym

November 14th, 2023 at 9:56 PM ^

None of those, but all the signatories are listed at the end of the PDF linked in my blog post:  https://bit.ly/harbaughamicus. Quite a few former athletes going back decades signed — Ian Bunting was a more recent one. I’m sure there are many other names people will recognize, and lots of people who aren’t household names, but are important in the community, like season-ticket holders, donors, professors at other universities, etc. 1700ish signatures = 28 pages with two columns at 12pt or 13pt font.

Unfortunately, there are some latecomers I couldn’t include — even though they seemed legitimate, I didn’t have time to confirm them with the Alumni Association.

And of course you had your obligatory one or two OSU or Sparty trolls submitting fake names with the word “cheater” in them. 

Joined: 09/07/2019

MGoPoints: 1676

rym

November 14th, 2023 at 11:48 PM ^

Bummer. My team was racing to file all day after I essentially pulled an all-nighter, so small mistakes are inevitable. That particular one would have resulted from an alum filling out the wrong field or misinterpreting a question; there were a few of those but I apparently overlooked one.

Mr./Ms. "Yes" was still validated by the Alumni Association based on the other info they provided, though.

Joined: 09/07/2019

MGoPoints: 1676

Tunneler

November 14th, 2023 at 9:06 PM ^

However much it helps, I am for it. Michigan has been smeared, and the restoration of its reputation begins with Harbaugh calling his team, America’s team. This action furthers that narrative along. Get vindication in the courts. And  ESPN should be forced to run a very targeted ad campaign, through very many completely compensated commercials featuring The University of Michigan.

Joined: 08/01/2013

MGoPoints: 26034