Why Wasn’t the TRO Granted?

Maybe a strategy to make sure we get it for OSU.  get a better chance this way after he misses two 2 games.  

And btw, any recent OSU fan doesn't want Jim out.  There are maybe 5% of them.  I wouldn't want their coach out in the game.  

The gist was UM couldn't show irreparable harm against them without the NCAA being part of the hearing, and so it wasn't granted.  I suspect this might also have been a judge not wanting to look too biased here because the harm to the NCAA by not being heard is virtually nil, but that's the argument there will be a hearing on Friday and I assume the TRO will be granted then.  Of course, I've been wrong a ton about the rules and law around this situation so WTF do I know.

EDIT:  Meant B1G where I said NCAA.  It's weird because AFAIK all the evidence has been obtained by the NCAA but the B1G is relying on that evidence, sometimes simply described to them and not actually possessed, for their preemptive actions.

First of all, NOTHING is certain in the law other than if you have a lot of money for legal fees, you have a better chance.

Any answer to this from anyone other than the "judge", whoever that is, is just speculation, but evidently, the moment was too big for them, and they, or he, or she, decided they needed to take a breath before doing anything like issuing a ruling.  Barb McQuade said it best, "Weak."

The reporting has not been good. I cannot even tell who the judge assigned to the case and/or the application for TRO/Prelim Injunction is, and it's not a hard question to ask, and it's a pretty easy one to answer, but there is no clarity, which is not passing the smell test.  

It's still a slam dunk case, and hard to envision a scenario where Michigan loses Friday, but, and I repeat, NOTHING is certain. That said, I expect to see Harbaugh on the sidelines come Saturday.

I don’t think it was that it wasn’t granted. There wasn’t enough time to make an honest ruling on it. 

and if that’s true, then that’s fine.

We end up listening only to those we want to hear, and block out the rest. That's why it felt inevitable.

While everyone here looks through their blue colored glasses, you need to understand some fundamentals: 1. Courts do not easily grant TROs where when we are talking about protecting a non-health/safety related subject. Football is important here, ultimately not very important to a judge. Michigan’s case on the “irreparable harm” requirement was always objectively the weakest part of their case, as we saw yesterday when UM won. Don’t be surprised if UM winning yesterday sinks their case later this week

No.  This is easy.  JH is party.  JH not being able to coach games is a harm to JH.  And it cannot be remedied by $$$ if he wins at trial a year form now...

Is it possible the court will grant the TRO and Harbaugh is allowed to coach oneor both games only to have it lifted and he not be allowed to coach the championship game? I really want that asshole Petitti have to look Harbaugh in the eye and hand him the trophy.

I am not a Michigan lawyer so have no opinion on the procedural aspects that have been discussed here. But having read the Commissioner's statement and UM's complaint and motion, here is my perspective on why the judge may not have issued a TRO Saturday morning:

The lateness of the statement gave UM's lawyers virtually no time, just a few hours, to address the Commissioner's specific arguments, so they were forced to file pre-written documents. And I can tell you that the mechanical aspects of filing documents like these are considerable. Making sure everything is formatted correctly, all citations are checked and double-checked, and everything is proofread takes time. I often say that writing your arguments is the easy part. Getting them in shape for filing is what is tough. And even as it was, a few typos in Michigan's papers crept in.

So there were a number of points raised by the Commissioner that they didn't, and undoubtedly couldn't, address, such as that the NCAA said that Michigan's violations were proven and that coaches told the Commissioner that they couldn't easily change signs. They didn't mention the spreadsheet that played a big part in the Commissioner's ruling. They made their own arguments on things like the Commissioner's authority to use his sportsmanship powers in situations like this, but they didn't answer what the Commissioner said about it. They also didn't address the Commissioner's claim that, even though the sanction was directed against Harbaugh, he wasn't being sanctioned, the University was. 

So I think it is possible that, after the judge read all the papers, he or she (I also think it's odd that we don't know who the judge is, but this all happened over a weekend and there has been no ruling signed by the judge) didn't feel that there was a sufficient basis to rule for Michigan and wanted to hear more.

I’m a retired lawyer, who had a number of cases involving TRO’s and Preliminary Injunctions, albeit in Federal court. It’s not uncommon for a judge to deny the TRO and then hold an expedited hearing on the preliminary injunction. I’m not sure if Kuhnke is doing something like that here, but it sure sounds like it. I also wouldn’t be surprised if Kuhnke at some point before Friday encourages Michigan and the B1G to get together and work this out. And, I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s an agreement wherein Michigan does not agree with the penalty or findings, but agrees that JH won’t coach the Maryland game, but will coach the tOSU game.

FWIW, I thought the facts, at least those I was aware of, were compelling enough for Kuhnke to grant the TRO and then schedule a follow-up hearing this week. However, one of the issues may have been the delay in getting her the pleadings, etc., since the case was initially assigned to another judge.

Giving the B1G a chance to explain why they are being dumb. Should go: oh we’re not: look! And then the judge will go: you’re being dumb and he can coach.