SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 11
Legal Brief #1 Tom Barbone
Case 83-1342 Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (P) Vs. National Collegiate Athletic Association (D)
Antitrust
Sherman Act
CIAW Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics for Women 1981-1982 NCAA introduced 27 national championships
NCAA’s Contested Conduct Single flat fee to enter women's athletics Guaranteed transportation and per diem for championships Financial incentives to enter female teams Packaged women's basketball championship
District Court Decision Noncommercial dimension therefore not subject to liability from conduct alone NCAA not trying to start a monopoly Analysis The district found that the NCAA has not attempted to gain a monopoly AIAW showed that the NCAA’s takeover was a likelihood
Analysis cont. The courts viewed NCAA’s objective was not to takeover women’s athletics The NCAA did not use their new power to leverage more money out of schools Could not be ruled anticompetitive Did not violate any of the three sections of the Sherman act
Works Cited http://logomentor.com/ncaa-logo http://prettytough.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/unc.jpg http://www.blindloop.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Michigan-Stadium.jpg http://www.meachoops.com/news/default/1/30/ http://www.brown.edu/Facilities/University_Library/exhibits/sports/women_printable.html http://www.sacbee.com/2010/04/06/2660163/ncaa-womans-basketball-final-stanford.html?mi_rss=Photo%20Galleries http://www.textually.org/tv/archives/images/set3/Large_NBC_logo.png http://www.jrohman.com/clients.htm
Works Cited cont. http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/blog/2010/01/tca_winter_2010.html http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=4331075 http://www.doubleazone.com/Images_Story/sbtrophy2.jpg http://www.ftc.gov/opp/workshops/rpm/ http://openjurist.org/735/f2d/577/association-for-intercollegiate-athletics-for-women-v-national-collegiate-athletic-association

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Sport law legal brief #1 presentation
Sport law  legal brief #1 presentationSport law  legal brief #1 presentation
Sport law legal brief #1 presentationEndicott College
 
Sport law legal brief presentation
Sport law legal brief presentationSport law legal brief presentation
Sport law legal brief presentationFrank Campo
 
How to Build a Dynamic Social Media Plan
How to Build a Dynamic Social Media PlanHow to Build a Dynamic Social Media Plan
How to Build a Dynamic Social Media PlanPost Planner
 
Learn BEM: CSS Naming Convention
Learn BEM: CSS Naming ConventionLearn BEM: CSS Naming Convention
Learn BEM: CSS Naming ConventionIn a Rocket
 
SEO: Getting Personal
SEO: Getting PersonalSEO: Getting Personal
SEO: Getting PersonalKirsty Hulse
 

Viewers also liked (6)

Sport law legal brief #1 presentation
Sport law  legal brief #1 presentationSport law  legal brief #1 presentation
Sport law legal brief #1 presentation
 
Title 9
Title 9Title 9
Title 9
 
Sport law legal brief presentation
Sport law legal brief presentationSport law legal brief presentation
Sport law legal brief presentation
 
How to Build a Dynamic Social Media Plan
How to Build a Dynamic Social Media PlanHow to Build a Dynamic Social Media Plan
How to Build a Dynamic Social Media Plan
 
Learn BEM: CSS Naming Convention
Learn BEM: CSS Naming ConventionLearn BEM: CSS Naming Convention
Learn BEM: CSS Naming Convention
 
SEO: Getting Personal
SEO: Getting PersonalSEO: Getting Personal
SEO: Getting Personal
 

AIAWvs. NCAA

  • 1. Legal Brief #1 Tom Barbone
  • 2. Case 83-1342 Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (P) Vs. National Collegiate Athletic Association (D)
  • 5. CIAW Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics for Women 1981-1982 NCAA introduced 27 national championships
  • 6.
  • 7. NCAA’s Contested Conduct Single flat fee to enter women's athletics Guaranteed transportation and per diem for championships Financial incentives to enter female teams Packaged women's basketball championship
  • 8. District Court Decision Noncommercial dimension therefore not subject to liability from conduct alone NCAA not trying to start a monopoly Analysis The district found that the NCAA has not attempted to gain a monopoly AIAW showed that the NCAA’s takeover was a likelihood
  • 9. Analysis cont. The courts viewed NCAA’s objective was not to takeover women’s athletics The NCAA did not use their new power to leverage more money out of schools Could not be ruled anticompetitive Did not violate any of the three sections of the Sherman act
  • 10. Works Cited http://logomentor.com/ncaa-logo http://prettytough.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/unc.jpg http://www.blindloop.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Michigan-Stadium.jpg http://www.meachoops.com/news/default/1/30/ http://www.brown.edu/Facilities/University_Library/exhibits/sports/women_printable.html http://www.sacbee.com/2010/04/06/2660163/ncaa-womans-basketball-final-stanford.html?mi_rss=Photo%20Galleries http://www.textually.org/tv/archives/images/set3/Large_NBC_logo.png http://www.jrohman.com/clients.htm
  • 11. Works Cited cont. http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/blog/2010/01/tca_winter_2010.html http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=4331075 http://www.doubleazone.com/Images_Story/sbtrophy2.jpg http://www.ftc.gov/opp/workshops/rpm/ http://openjurist.org/735/f2d/577/association-for-intercollegiate-athletics-for-women-v-national-collegiate-athletic-association