Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Decision Invoking GAME OF THRONES – There Is No Middle Ground

By Tiffany Blofield on February 21, 2018
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

A United States Magistrate Judge in Northern California relied on the Game of Thrones where there is no “Middle Ground” in rendering his decision to award attorneys’ fees for the work spent on all claims brought by former student athletes against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”).  The student athletes were victorious on certain claims and damages, but not others.  For all of you basketball fans, the marquee plaintiff for the case was Ed O’Bannon.

Some of you, like me, may be going through withdrawal from watching Game of Thrones and are frustrated that we will not be able to see the final season until 2019.  This may be why I focused on this dispute and am blogging about it.  Unfortunately, I have no official spoilers to share with you about the show other than that actor Kit Harrington also known as Jon Snow was seen in Croatia filming.  This likely means the new season of Game of Thrones will have a Cersei Lannister versus Jon Snow showdown in King’s Landing.  But, I digress.

The Magistrate Judge invoked the widely popular show to explain why even though the student athletes had not prevailed on all of their claims against the NCAA they should receive attorneys’ fees incurred for all claims.  The Magistrate Judge held that the attorneys for the student athletes should be awarded $42 million in attorneys’ fees.

The main claim was that the NCAA violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act by conspiring to exclude them from the collegiate licensing market.  The reasoning behind these type of fee awards is to encourage attorneys to take cases where the plaintiffs may not have the money otherwise to bring them.

Through the lawsuit, the student-athletes successfully protected their publicity rights. They obtained injunctive relief but did not obtain an award for deferred cash payments.  Specifically, the injunction prohibited the NCAA from using the student athletes’ right of publicity (names, images and likeness).  Further, the NCAA made voluntary changes to its system as a result of the lawsuit.

We have previously blogged about rights of publicity here and here.

In its appeal, the NCAA has argued to the Ninth Circuit that it should reject the $42 million fee award to the attorneys for the student athletes.  The NCAA argues that the student athletes won considerably less than what they sought in the lawsuit.  Further, the students were denied any deferred cash payments.  The student athletes failed on multiple claims, including collegiate licensing theory, and no damage class was certified.  The NCAA argues that the attorneys for the student athletes should not be entitled to any fees whatsoever, or at most, substantially less than the $42 million awarded.

Do you think the Ninth Circuit judges are fans of Game of Thrones and will uphold the Magistrate Judge’s “no middle ground” award of attorneys’ fees?

 

Photo of Tiffany Blofield Tiffany Blofield

View my professional biography

Although my initial career path was to be one of the Supremes (not the musically talented ones with platform shoes and sequins, but rather, the nine wearing sensible shoes and pressed black robes in DC), I will likely stay…

View my professional biography

Although my initial career path was to be one of the Supremes (not the musically talented ones with platform shoes and sequins, but rather, the nine wearing sensible shoes and pressed black robes in DC), I will likely stay in Minnesota as I have never lived anywhere else (though I have traveled across many borders, including the pond, and various state lines).

My calling to the courtroom, led me to earn my law degree from the University of Minnesota, after receiving my undergraduate degree in Economics and Psychology from St. Olaf College. After law school, I quickly realized that I’m more at ease in the courtroom than in my own living room, so I became a litigator. Over the years, I have developed my own style of litigating (I’m trying to trademark it) and aggressively represent my clients whether I am protecting valuable intellectual property or tackling the interests of professional athletes. Although I am not as wacky or as flaky as Ally McBeal, litigation still holds its “entertainment value” after fifteen years in the profession. This year’s Valentine’s Day festivities are evidence (pun intended) of my passion — instead of celebrating the typical Valentine’s Day with dinner and roses, our litigation team celebrated the seventh anniversary of the then largest jury verdict in Minnesota. The verdict came after a nine year battle and, as a result, V-Day has now become known as “Verdict Day.” I’m hoping to rename more holidays soon.

Email
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Intellectual Property
  • Blog:
    DuetsBlog
  • Organization:
    Winthrop & Weinstine, P.A.
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo