|
|
|
|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Hearing Scheduled to Stop JMU CutsRoanoke Hearing on July 19 Could Reinstate Teams for 2007-08July 13, 2007 -- Roanoke, Virginia -- On July 19, 2007, Equity in Athletics, Inc. ("EIA") and James Madison University ("JMU") will appear before Judge Glen E. Conrad to argue over EIA's motion for a preliminary injunction. If granted, the motion would reinstate the ten teams until the Court resolves the merits of the dispute. Before the hearing, EIA plans to reply to the Department of Education ("DOE") brief filed last night in support of JMU. The key issues at the hearing likely will be (1) whether the "balance of harms" tips to EIA or JMU (i.e., comparing the harms to the JMU students of losing the teams versus the harms to JMU of having to reinstate the teams), (2) whether EIA or JMU is more likely to succeed on the merits, (3) whether JMU has enough time to reinstate the teams for the 2007-08 academic year, and (4) how much of an "injunction bond" EIA must post as security to cover the possibility that EIA would win a preliminary injunction, but lose on the merits. EIA's answers are: (1) EIA, (2) EIA, (3) yes, and (4) $1.00. JMU's answers are: (1) JMU, (2) JMU, (3) no (or maybe not), and (4) ~$550,000.00. For many of the sports (e.g., swimming, track, cross country, archery), competitions already will be scheduled, whether or not JMU reinstates the cut teams. Accordingly, EIA anticipates that JMU will concede that at least some of the seasons are viable. For other sports, JMU has a history of forming seasons or hiring coaches after the school year starts. Other than the merits dispute about whether the JMU cuts were lawful, the largest dispute may center on the size of the injunction bond. EIA will argue that JMU must break down the dollar figures for each team because some teams are inexpensive (archery, fencing) and other teams have built-in infrastructure, such as coaches and facilities, from the existing women's teams (swimming, track, cross country). EIA also will argue that the teams should be able to rely on the per-team revenue-sharing funds from the National Collegiate Athletic Association. Further, assuming that EIA wins a preliminary injunction, but loses on the merits to the Title IX proportionality test, cutting the teams will cost JMU more money than it saves. Specifically, the cuts throw JMU out of "scholarship proportionality," even as JMU attains "participation proportionality." Because reinstating the ten cut teams would lessen JMU's overall Title IX obligations under DOE's view of the Title IX, EIA has asked the Court to require only a $1.00 bond. The Court could either rule on the preliminary injunction at the hearing or take the matter under advisement, issuing a decision later. As indicated by the injunction-bond issue, winning a preliminary injunction does not guarantee that EIA will win on the merits, and losing a preliminary injunction does not mean that EIA cannot win on the merits. EIA’s counsel are Lawrence J. Joseph (Washington, D.C.), Douglas G. Schneebeck (Albuquerque, New Mexico) and Thomas H. Miller (Roanoke, Virginia). Schneebeck is a graduate of James Madison University, and was the captain of JMU’s 1982 track and field squad. Men’s track is among the sports set for elimination by JMU. Media inquiries should be directed to John Licata (703-925-2021) and Doug Schneebeck (505-848-1869). More information is available at http://www.equityinathletics.org For More Information Contact: |
Send website comments to web@equityinathletics.org. Copyright 2008 (pictograms used by permission) |