Nixon Peabody Client Alerts
As an associate at Nixon Peabody, I draft alerts to our clients to provide updates on major regulatory changes and litigation in labor/employment, higher education, and sports law. All of my client alerts can be found at my Nixon Peabody profile: Link
IRS memorandum concludes NIL collectives are not tax exempt
A June 2023 IRS memorandum lays out a firm stance taken on the tax status of NIL collectives.
What’s the Impact?
NIL collectives should be cautious around soliciting tax deductible donations from boosters and operating as a traditional nonprofit under 501(c)(3).
IRS memorandum concludes NIL collectives are not tax exempt
A June 2023 IRS memorandum lays out a firm stance taken on the tax status of NIL collectives.
What’s the Impact?
NIL collectives should be cautious around soliciting tax deductible donations from boosters and operating as a traditional nonprofit under 501(c)(3).
Child Victims Act Plaintiffs precluded from filing lapsed federal abuse claims
The Second Circuit has ruled that New York’s Child Victims Act does not revive or toll time-barred Title IX and Section 1983 claims.
What’s the Impact?
Plaintiffs suing educational institutions and personnel related to alleged historical sexual abuse under state revival statutes like the Child Victims Act face increasing difficulty in establishing federal court jurisdiction.
Five federal appellate courts have now held that specialized state statutes for sexual abuse claims do not revive otherwise untimely Section 1983 or Title IX claims.
Federal Court hears oral arguments in college athlete NIL case
Counsel for the NCAA and current and former college athletes argued on class certification before the US District Court, Northern District of California.
What’s the Impact?
The complaint seeks retroactive compensation for athletes who were denied NIL opportunities and broadcast revenue compensation.
The NCAA cites Title IX as a bar against issuing uneven broadcast revenue to Division I athletes.
The outcome of this case and other related proceedings will set the requisite regulatory framework for college sports moving forward.
Landmark NIL settlements: Implications and unanswered questions
As formally announced on May 23, 2024, the NCAA, Big Ten, SEC, Pac-12, Big 12, and ACC announced a landmark settlement of House v. NCAA, Hubbard v. NCAA, and Carter v. NCAA, three pending antitrust lawsuits aimed at the NCAA’s limits on name, image, and likeness (NIL)-related compensation and benefits. Although the presiding US District Court Judge must still approve the settlement, its impact is top of mind for many athletic departments and college athletics stakeholders. While many questions remain, a few key takeaways have emerged:
With borrower defense claims on the rise, how should schools respond?
Schools across the country are facing a steep increase in borrower defense to repayment claims—with little practical guidance from the Department of Education.
What’s the Impact?
The Department of Education is processing borrower defense to repayment applications at an expedited rate—schools may challenge these claims in a number of ways.
The Fifth Circuit has scheduled oral argument on the borrower-friendly 2022 BDR Rules on November 6, 2023.
Title IX complaint against University of Oregon features NIL arguments
Women student-athletes bring class action against the university alleging disparate treatment in several respects, including opportunity to participate in intercollegiate sports and NIL.
What’s the Impact?
The players attempt to argue that Title IX applies to NIL opportunities.
Higher education institutions should be aware of the potential risk in relationships between athletic departments and NIL collectives.
Northeastern University Law Review Online Forum
While a law student at Northeastern, I was published in the Northeastern University Law Review Online Forum. The piece below weighs the potential effects of sports gambling legislation.
Published: March 24, 2020 – LINK
Synopsis: A comprehensive timeline of sports gambling in the United States throughout the 21st century which includes high-profile point-shaving scandals that have caused hesitancy around bringing sports gambling to the forefront. But the national reluctance was shattered when the Supreme Court in Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass’n (2018) struck down a federal ban on sports gambling held in the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA). The court through anti-commandeering and federalism principles decided that Congress could no longer require states to enact legislation in furtherance of PASPA. However, the decision lacks commentary on the subject of the law in question—sports gambling. Now the choice is left to states to adopt pro-sports gambling legislation and open the floodgates to a multi-billion dollar industry, as well as address the potential pitfalls that come with it.