Share This Episode
Outlaw Lawyer Josh Whitaker & Joe Hamer Logo

NCAA v. Alston and Listener Questions!

Outlaw Lawyer / Josh Whitaker & Joe Hamer
The Truth Network Radio
July 2, 2021 12:00 pm

NCAA v. Alston and Listener Questions!

Outlaw Lawyer / Josh Whitaker & Joe Hamer

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 53 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


July 2, 2021 12:00 pm

Attorneys Josh Whitaker and Joe Hamer do a deep dive into the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the NCAA decision with the case NCAA v. Alston. The  Supreme Court upheld the lower Federal Court and 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that the NCAA or colleges could not limit "education-related" benefits to student-athletes.  Josh and Joe will explain further,.

To reach the law firm, call 800-659-1186, email questions@theoutlawyer.com or visit TheOutlawLawyer.com 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Focus on the Family
Jim Daly
Truth for Life
Alistair Begg
The Steve Noble Show
Steve Noble
Moody Church Hour
Erwin Lutzer
Family Life Today
Dave & Ann Wilson, Bob Lepine

Yellow lawyer working to do a deep dive on the recent Supreme Court decision handed down the NCAA and its impact on the future of collegiate athletics will also be looking at the history of some legal challenges to the NCAA and will also take the time to answer a listener question next spring court has said time is a necessary job now taken the fax think about him and you'll jump to a man your thou will and now outlaw lawyer Josh Whitaker. Welcome to this week's episode of the outlaw lawyer as always, I'm Josh Whitaker I'm one of your host or other host is Joe Hamer. Welcome Joe, thanks for having me Josh I know you can ask me.

I feel fantastic today had to be here will get that the way early. We are partners over Whitaker and Hamer, a law firm with offices in Raleigh, Garner Clayton, Goldsboro and Fuquay Marina serving Lake Johnston hornet Wayne and surrounding counties. Our law firm has many attorneys in many offices and many staff persons to serve you. If you have a question for the law firm are the show you give us a call at one 806 five 911 $0.86. Her phone number 1-800-659-1186 and so you can use that to again get a hold of lawyers Whitaker and Hamer or the show the outlaw lawyer to question or comment for us. We always love to hear from folks we like listener questions. We try to address some of those every show, and we also have an email address questions@theoutlawlawyer.com.

Remember, you put the D in there. The outlaw your.com that's also our website so all of our episodes past and present are there and you can listen to those or download our show a number of other ways off that website that is correct. DL along your unit. We like to take a look on this show at how the law which again interest is very much as practicing attorneys how that intersects with every facet of everyday life and we love to hear from you guys.

We love to interact with our loyal extremely loyal diehard fans to reach out to us. Choose an email any questions you have. Again, we just love to hear from you Joey. Always we always horribleness and they will do it again. You know if your attorneys experience your fiduciaries experience your professional experience matters. So when you're looking for attorney, CPA, any of those folks. Experience matters are law firms experience thing stands toe to toe with about any lot but is Saturday so any offer toe to toe. That is like a wrestlemania type event where all the competitors were attorneys they would be in the main event we would be in the main event.

Yeah, you know, experience matters when you're looking for professional or fiduciary someone to help you in a professional capacity unit. We always recommend you don't don't don't go bargain hunting looking for the cheapest person around to help you with that and who you choose is very important in that experience really matters in our firm is always going to try to balance a reasonable cost.

With the wealth of experience that we bring you against several attorneys several offices serving the surrounding area for our listeners and and like Josh that many staff persons that we have Joey were where certain title for someone the other day we had a title search came in the office and we went back and for this title searcher back in the 1950s and at that time a great decade it was. It was early 1950s, and couples getting separated are I guess they Darden separated a gun remarried and so they were training the Red Cross we collect call stating they were needing each other some interest they may have in the property and the deeds were recorded out of order and nothing nobody had to search title. This property is family property.

So in it until 2021. That mistake was still there. Is amazing. It's amazing how we how we uncover these fossils of the mistakes and bask in the wood. There was very expensive.

Corrective measures that had to be taken for something that was done wrong in the 1950s those people in the 1950s were probably bargain searching for that attorney and not valuing experience. Experience matters like we talked about Michelle is a balancing of equity. No one wants to spend a fortune on their attorney and we thing at the firm. We do a good job balancing price fees versus experience that's always important us and we would like to talk about that because I support the balance of price fees, experience and integrate people. Josh certainly has some fantastic individuals that work with us. If I do say so myself origin. So today I think that you know I think is also important to my experience. Talk about being local and being in the communities where you live you practice in the communities where you live United that's very important I think is very important to to to look at that local P since any note, Josh. You actually grew up in the very community that you practice and is that correct that is correct. I am from I am from Raleigh, grew up on that side a Raleigh that's coming in between Garner and Fuquay's I spent a lot of time in Garner and Fuquay spent lots on McLean which enters your neck of the woods yet. Clayton is my neck of the woods. Josh and I grew up in Clayton born and raised live in Clayton. Now it was a time when I knew virtually every person in Clayton and I Clayton unit was changed a lot since then has grown really exponentially short period of time. You know it's it's I love serving the community that I live in especially being able to serve the legal needs of the community that also grew up in that my family grew up in. I've got generations of play Tony and his ideas now and if that was a Clayton night paving that I get the nothing is as important things is a lot about you. Josette says is a lot about the firm you know we are a we consider we consider ourselves a were in Raleigh. We consider ourselves a small town firm at heart, but we have the size we have attorneys we have the staff we have the experience of a I don't know her but I would say regional law firms. I've always thought of us as a a little big for yeah you know it's it's important to have that balance and I am like you said, I think we balance the local presence.

You know, as far as the personalized attention. The attention to detail, the involvement in the community.

The relatability of our attorneys. The knowing who you're dealing with. We balance that well with some of the benefits you get from these larger law firms where you've got the several office locations you got the large support staff I think is the best of both worlds. Josh, I really do again if we can ever be of help to you wanting hundred 659-1186 that phone line is set up to to take a message so you won't get a live person. If you call it number, leave us a detailed message.

Give us some good contact information I someone with the message the other day no phone number. No email address and I really like to talk to that person but you need to get contact information 100-659-1180 6R yes can email questions that's plural questions that the outlaw lawyer.com if you want to know more about the firm or you want to know more about me and Joe unit.

The outlaw aired.com and there's information there.

If you want to know more about the two of us. I know fact about you Josh, in talking about the local nature of the both of us really live. Our listeners know we talked about it before on the show and that's our our history as player and coach and that recreational basketball scene for young Borges, North Carolina. That's right, that's right.

We I coach you guys when you were 1089 years old up until you were probably get ready to go to college and I don't have this officially, but I'm pretty sure Josh won the award for greatest 89 your basketball coach in the history of the world. We in my wife's clean up some stuff and came across some pictures of you guys when you really you were young. Plan basketball so want to get those up on the website to confirm the people know were not lying. If you'd like to see my 8 to 9-year-old basketball pictures, 1-800-659-1186 RJ Lugo Memorial focus on today, so today you Josh were both pretty big sports fans would like to talk about sports and big fans of collegiate athletics and just very recently, the Supreme Court is actually handed down a decision that can have some pretty wide reaching ramifications on collegiate athletics and amateurism. In general, so we'll talk a little bit about that will answer again, our favorite thing in the world will answer some listener questions call us with your questions.

We love to hear.

We loved answer them and we love to talk to you guys but yes so we got a few things to talk about really in a dive heavy into the NCAA and and how the law has most recently intersected with college sports. One of our favorite things. RJ was take a quick break coming up on the outlaw along your working to discuss the history of amateur athletics in the NCAA and how the law has historically looked at the NCAA college athletes talk about and how it affects the in C AA so Joe and I are both big college fans. Joe is unfortunately a Duke fan. I am for better or worse, NC State fan so we college athletics that's bigger to me than the pros in a group down here that's what you had.

That's what you had and that it was really keen around these parts, you know I'm not going to public school back in in my day way back not even that long ago. Hmmm, but it it college athletics were were huge thing. The ACC tournament is a huge thing. I vividly remember, you know, class stop, and teachers role in TVs in so everyone can watch the ACC tournament and it's always just been a huge part of life me a lot a lot of people are defined by their collegiate alliance.

In a lot of ways it only add teams they pull for. It's just wrong. Tobacco Road.

It's a big big thing here.

I know before before we talk about any case, you know, the sprinklers always agree kindly know what's happened before, you need to know the history you need to know how we got to this point before a new taser or new decision makes sense.

So Joe was put this in perspective were what's that was the history of the lawn house affected NCAA Josh, you said it well. History really matters and in history really matters when were looking at the way that the law has looked at the NCAA and kind of helped shape the current tradition of the NCAA, and it's important to look at that history when you're kind of tracking the gradual reformation of college sports and amateurism so will do a brief rundown to, let you guys know how we got to where we are today before we dive into the most recent ruling so the arguments that are before the Supreme Court today, which will get into. They were actually shaped way back in 1984, 37 years ago when the case of NCAA versus Board of Regents. So in that case, Justice John Paul Stevens actually set the stage and wrote the majority opinion, which stated the NCAA plays a critical role in the maintenance of a revered tradition of amateurism in college sports and that's really the way that things have been for most of our lifetimes that amateurism pieces been important.

So what does that really mean today so Seth Waxman is actually the lawyer for the NCAA in that the current case and he framed this historical foundation were talking about with his statement that said that for more than 100 years. The distinct character of college sports has been that it is played by students who were amateur, which is essentially to say that they're not paid to play and and you're right as the ways been for a long time and and as as we sail out on the show.

Things are different now social media.

You know, as she as change the way that everybody communicates in the way coaches and a lot of the rules in sub NCAA has in place to to I guess in their in their thoughts, preserve amateurism, or maybe outdated and maybe don't make a whole lot of sense in today's world.

Yeah, and it's funny because you think of the way that viewpoints change and in our never growing up and it was a different landscape for college.

You know, again, there's there's several college sports unit that were to focus more on the more the bigger college sports.

At least in this area as far as you know college football college basketball McKenna focus our talk around there but again there are several several college but it did shifts and perspectives in the shifts in the way that the games are played. The makeup of teams like growing up. He didn't have the one and done rule you didn't have individuals that were either completely opting out of college going directly to the MBA or as it is now spending the one year in college before they jump ship to an MBA in the case of college basketball, you would see. You know, people come in the school amateur college athletes. They stick around for four years you get to see that growth and is just a completely different landscape. I'm trying the first side of the fire publicly admitted this, but in high school is a Carolina fan. I don't a lot of people this and am very ashamed of it now, but when I was growing up, I got taller quicker how to play center a lot. I like to you know I like a lot of the centers that Carolina had come in three site officially become state fans. I went to state so that's that's hard for me to talk about. I just jot but I am but when I'm trying to remember the first player that I remember not staying for four years because they could go through it. It's a very it's a recent phenomenon. Even when I'm not saying it now. I don't have a history book in front of me I can't say that if it never happened but it it wasn't something that was prevalent and you would see players that stuck around for a substantially longer period of time than you see players now seem like there was a different mindset. In general surrounding sports and you know the players of allegiant policy allegiance but the plague of the way that that players really embodied that university and represented that university and it still happens today but it's just a different era.

Now man it's it's completely different. You've got kids with the advent of social media and will talk more about social media, but you got a lot of kids were come at high school and have been millions of followers, not a high school and have already built their own individual brand and just have no notoriety and fame on a level that was previously unheard of.

You didn't hear about back in the day like you do. Now I know that state. If you follow state recruiting and it would to the past three years we've had a 45 star kid come out commit and then end up going going pro going to the G league never, never stepping foot on campus you have one from deftly in a play year to a college ball to I'm gone) you can't blame the kids yeah you can't blame the kids and imparted issue that were discussing here and the discussion of amateurism is the NCAA has really grown into a billion-dollar industry and you're talking about. There are several individuals who were just becoming filthy rich from the sports that are being played, the TV revenue.

All of the revenue that is generated in all of this revenue is generated based on the play of the individual players who again are not entitled to the lion share of this revenue that goes to the individuals around them which again will talk about and in more detail as well get a model I get just it just it it it made perfect sense to me back in the back in the 80s and then just as we get further away you know is the diameters are getting are getting a college education which has a value and I was always the argument you know and it did. It made perfect sense. You know you can vividly remember hearing it was always you have these these individuals are getting a college education that is sufficient compensation. But again, I think those arguments were made at a time, and I mean college basketball college football's always been big business, but I me were talking billion-dollar business now and you know it it it it becomes as it has in the most recent case, it literally becomes an antitrust issue is what were looking at here so the prevailing principal for the NCAA and like we discussed has long been that amateurism is the defining factor of college sports and that not compensating the student athletes is a necessity to protect the sanctity of the sport but you know that definition of amateurism has really shifted and evolved over time, so there was a time way back in the day when the NCAA didn't even allow full athletic grants and scholarships that you couldn't even get a full scholarship as kids do today which is yeah of course. Nowadays, kids can get those full scholarships and there was even a time in the late 70s where the NCAA actually expanded that definition and defined in amateur to be a student that played amateur college sport but also allow them to be a paid professional athlete in another sport.

The point being, it's never really been a static definition and and that's what's so makes the NCAA's position so difficult here is that you can't really say that it's it's you've always defined amateurism in a college athlete in one way when it's kind of been that shifting an evolving type of concept over time.

The witness was to come back and into the life of audiences coming to share my crazy right tire. I read that I so in that that gets into at A separate subset but it's it's related you're talking about their we ever if you're in a videogame and college videogame fan you know that you belong suffered a drought in college related video games because it's a likeness issue.

So you've hereby college videogame you can never have the actual players you had to download bootleg teams because he can't again. They these players can't profit off of their likeness and NCAA can't profit off the likeness so that is a coming down the pipeline type of thing.

So I think we could potentially see the resurgence of college basketball and football games and then you can rejoice jot you can stop playing the 2000 and play football attestation. I don't interrupt you were talking about how the how the NCAA's changes billion-dollar.

The whole time we been doing is I just been thinking about. I know I read that will get another football game this year, so I hope that is the case, God willing, we will do that so but yeah so again you know long and in with the NCAA's argument is always been is is just protecting that amateur status and that's been the argument for not paying in compensating players and there are several reasons why they've made this argument, you know, one of the main reasons being to keep the playing field level. You know you don't want. If it becomes a bidding war for players, then you're going to ruin any sense of parity is what the argument is, but in reality is it really a level playing field now for everyone others. There's there's ancillary ways and and there's other ways that schools can spend money to kind of on level that playing field so it's it's kind of a tough argument to advance but again that's kind of the history of how we got here. The courts always given a good bit of deference to the NCAA on these matters and it's never really taken up the issue in the way that it has most recently so you know again as we move into the present working to see some things being defined and some changes that could really really have some long far lasting implications for the structure of the NCAA moving forward are jealous, take a break we come back will will jump headlong into this case coming up we talk. The recent Supreme Court ruling in NCAA, the cost and we will talk about the facts of the case and dig into yet another unanimous ruling by the Supreme Court will have big implications for college sports about how things of progress from the 70s to to now how how the court has, looked at the few cases they they've been given. Up until this point, and so now we are ready to talk about incivility versus Austin Joe was aware of facts or just you know I love facts and I love giving you the factual rundown settling NCAA V Alston in this case. We've got several several Division I football and basketball players who filed a suit against the NCAA, arguing that its restrictions on non-cash educational related benefits violates antitrust laws under the Sherman act. The District Court, in reviewing this case actually found 40 athletes and held that the NCAA must allow for certain types of academic benefits such as computers, science equipment, musical instruments and other tangible items that aren't included in the cost of attendance but nonetheless are related to the pursuit of academic studies. However, the District Court held that NCAA may still limit cash or cash equivalent awards for academic purposes.

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit actually affirmed the District Court's decision recognizing that the NCAA's interest in quote. Preserving amateurism is important, but they concluded.

Nevertheless, it is a violation of established antitrust laws. Joseph I don't know that I've ever said amateurism is much as I've said it in the show. I think maybe in my life I've said it twice until today really get that working to get your amateurism count up through the roof today brother and I so basically this is a this is an antitrust case about the legality of colleges, by and through the NCAA agreeing to limit compensate compensation for student athletes. That's right so federal antitrust law prohibits competing businesses from unreasonably restraining how they compete in the basic rationale with that is that when competitors work together some element of the economy might experience higher prices, fewer choices and less innovation as a result of everybody just basically harmoniously working together and agreeing upon these things on the Alston case argues that by capping grants-in-aid to tuition and fees and room and board and other expenses up to the value of the full cost of attendance that again.

The NCAA has violated that federal antitrust law.

So while big schools can offer millions of dollars and fringe benefits to bring in the top coaches schools are capped on what can be offered to athletes and I would note coaches command large salaries large large that we should go into coaching, which you then going to coaching with out about one of the greatest red coaches of all time. Mr. call I was I was compensated very poorly for the job she did at for all of our basketball playing listeners out there.

Coach Whitaker number one technique to get his team tuned up and ready play a game at 21 you get gotta get the energy outlay 17 games of 21 will win a championship every year.

Get a loosen up Sargasso coaches command high high salaries and it's not just coaching. It's there. This schools there are certain schools who have larger budgets than other schools, Duke University has a larger athletic budget and more money available to it than my beloved alma mater, Barton college may have. And with that money, although they can't necessarily legally pay athletes. There are several ancillary and fringe benefit types of things that are to make one school more attractive than another school. But none of these things necessarily read direct financial compensation or benefit to the student athletes so yeah day-to-day the court what's at issue in Austin isn't isn't something earth shattering ground breaking that will drastically shift the nature of college sports. Alston is asking NCAA to allow reimbursements to athletes for expenses pertaining to computer science equipment, musical instruments and other tangible academic related items not included in the cost of attendance calculation. Yeah so you know Alston's argument is that the these fringe benefits basically allow for all of this money tons of money to be funneled to the people around the recruits and athletes and the actual recruits and athletes who were the ones who are on the court and on the field and playing sports. They are actually being shorted on this gigantic financial benefit and at the end of the day.

Again, these are the individuals who were driving the product that is being watched, which is generating the billions for the NCAA in these other individuals and again the NCAA's counter this argument by referring to the ruling that we talked about originally that NCAA versus Board of Regents. I am basically stating that the court should view the NCAA's rules with great deference under antitrust law and they argue that those those caps we talked about on the grant in aid they actually enhance elements of the market and allow for there to be a distinction between college sports in pro sports and they actually make the argument that if you take that amateur element out of the game that fans will lose interest in the college game and and folks won't one watch college basketball anymore football and why you think you know just I had not a legal perspective, but I think people are losing interest in college borscht because of the way it is now because there are the elite athletes don't have to go. Usually you usually used to be where you you would want to go to college to showcase your talent and now there are other options out there so because bicycles not always get the most elite and I think that's it. We could do it pothole entire radio episode on the reasons for potential decline in interest but I mean part. You hit that you hit the nail on the head part of it is that part of it is the this substantial just you know turnover in teams you got people who come for years are gone for year.

People can't and this is him with every school with a lot of schools you can't get invested in the team because the makeup of the changes you had recent changes to the transfer portal that allow athletes to you know leave the school and start playing a mealy so you just it's a different world.

It's a different game and an even with some declining popularity still wildly profitable absolutely be getting couplings are important here to you. I think a lot of people are people who watch the court unit was lined up. I got again were not up were not a political show. We don't get involved in politics. But just as an observer of the Supreme Court got some trump appointees are on their first session will get her first chance take a look at them and you know I think there were some folks are really worried that there would be a lot of 54 decisions and this is this is unanimous ruling. A sport is important for the case and what it means for the NCAA going down the line. Nothing is also important than a lot and not a note Dino unanimous rulings. This session last slamdunk man that he knew the basketball analysis, the Supreme Court is to pick the cases that that they hear but it really looks like this court you know is is is working together and really trying to get down to the issues at hand. And I think allow the Supreme Court cases of been very interesting.

Just because there's so much a consensus are so much agreement and it certainly was here. There was no it was. It was unanimous and can just cabin all wrote the opinion for the majority, which I guess there was everybody right majority is not a yeah I think he actually wrote the concurrence but I think he is. He's been he's been thrown out there in the news because it was such a strong scathing rebuke of the NCAA certain again you not want to go back and touch on you touched on the fact that it was a fairly narrow, you know, it's a fairly narrow ruling in this case that the at issue is not the largest, most wide reaching thing, but the overall ruling I think is of just great importance and kindness signals of broader remedy that could have just a completely transformative impact in the future. On the way that college sports are played and how that NCAA functions but yet you just cabin on this case really seems to be a champion of student athletes seems to support player pay it. If nothing else, the gathering people having people were surprised betting. This has to be, if you're the NCAA you know anything else going for the spring courting the Supreme Court is kinda given you even notices and narrowly tailored ruling has far-reaching effects and that if I was the NCAA I would see this as if something else gets before the Supreme Court is probably not to go our way if you NCAA your day is a bad day for you. It's a Deming again.

Maybe it today isn't the end, but I mean this is the end is is coming at work and organist were definitely well a sum happens in our house you say something to happen in our lifetime. But I'm giving myself some years there yeah you never want to do so. We talked about Cavanaugh and he he had a really scathing opinion and hit in his opinion he referenced how the NCAA's attorney Seth Waxman made the argument that the NCAA had a right to define its business model because fans prefer watching unpaid players and Cavanaugh.

Actually, took apart that argument, and he wrote that all of the rest at all of the restaurants in the region cannot come together to cook Cook's wages on the theory that customers prefer to eat food from low-paid cooks, hospitals can't Agree to Nurses income in order to create a purer form of helping the sick and price-fixing labor is price-fixing, labor, and he concluded by saying the NCAA is not above the law can somehow get if you NCAA@the worst of what he said. I mean really laid the Hamer down on them and was really brutal in the way that he he picked them apart. But this this argument. I mean, are you with this argument of amateurism is is out dated and these are amateurs. These are these are people who are providing valuable, valuable labor while they happen to be students and you see you in doing the research for this you come upon stories of several student athletes who essentially are having to forfeit hundreds of thousands of dollars they could be making because they again aren't allowed to profit off of their likeness and you get into those sticky issues of amateurism and I mean it's it's just that it starts looking and equitable origin. I think it's a good time. Take a break and we will be back shortly coming up, we wrap up our discussion of NCAA V Austin by looking at where the NCAA goes from here, and what the future of college athletics Joan are to continue our discussion on this NCAA's court case that came down it's been a change a lot when were the other, just as a reminder, here the outlaw lawyer. We want to hear from you the listener.

We want to figure out what you would like us to talk about just to two attorneys who like to talk about the law would like to focus that on on what our listers may be thinking or may be interested in.

So if you have a suggestion for show.

You have a comment or question, or we've done something incorrect and you want to correct us will be glad to issue that correction forgotten something wrong but you can reach us at one 806 five 911 $0.86 1-800-659-1186. That line is a message so it's monitored, but you'll need to leave a message for us with good contact information in your question or concern and that will put you in touch with us here at the outlaw your and also put you in touch with their law firms Whitaker name or Joe and I during when were not doing the radio show we are practicing attorneys Whitaker name or his law firm with offices in Raleigh, Garner, Clayton Goldsborough and Feick wave arena where general practice law firms. We have attorneys at practice and a bunch of different areas.

So if you have a legal problem. More than likely we would be able to consult with you and and help you on that problem and if it's something we don't handle when you call us will certainly get you to someone who may be able to help you, but that number again.

It's 1-800-659-1186 and we have an email address as well. So questions that's plural questions at our domain name or website.

The outlaw lawyer.com so not outlaw lawyer.com it's the outlaw lawyer.com and together some information on me and Joe, the law firm all of our episodes or are are there and so you can listen to this episode again or you can listen to any of our previous episodes.

But again, we'd love to hear from you. In this segment ran talk about the NCAA case will also be getting to another listener question so we do take this questions very seriously and we like to like to delve into those we love to delve into them.

We love to hear from each and every one of you and check out that website.

We all of our greatest hits at your disposal for free every continent.

Some of our greatest radio shows right there available for your reach out to us. Ask us your questions again were not here to offer legal advice to anyone were here just to generally discuss the law because it interests us but we love to help you out.

So feel free to give us a call. Shoot us an email and just just get in touch with us. Let's interact right so we been talking about women talking about NCAA the Alston which is a case that had just recently been argued in front of the Supreme Court Supreme Court is just issued its ruling and it's it's another 90 unanimous ruling and justice Cavanaugh a really just dismantled the NCAA of NCAA was my client.

In this case and I got this ruling, I would be afraid to talk to them to use a basketball analogy, which will be appropriate.

Justice Cavanaugh has just dumped all over the NCAA and then hung on the rim and done the thing where you cannot wrap your legs around you young sure you know you will. You did a lot of donating of the basketball senior day, but it would be essentially embarrassed that the NCAA so there's been a number of moments in the past few decades as we've kind of talked about the development in the history of the NCAA, where it seemed like the NCAA's days may be numbered, but there's really never been anything like this, which is again a 90 unanimous Supreme Court ruling with an opinion that basically argues that the entire model and basis for the NCAA will not withstand legal scrutiny and so today may not be the day that the NCAA's model becomes illegal, but I think it's becoming more and more clear that the organization will soon have to basically forfeit any faade of legitimacy moving forward yeah I don't know. I don't know where to go from here. I mean it's it's you know there's money to be made in the people making that money united in their gonna want to continue to do that as long as they can. But at some point you got to you got the shifter model and I don't know if that's they allow certain amount of compensation per player per school and it's The men don't know what level you go existing if this comes before the Supreme Court. With the RightFax.

It's there for me as you may know anything will you and you know it's it's interesting because I think the I think the court I think everybody recognizes the it's not an open and shut type of issue immunity is in a sense that the equitable the just thing is to allow compensation but at the same time there are there's there certain concerns that have to be addressed as well and so you know with this decision at at. We talked about it.

Not a whole lot is changing today. It's just the tenor of the opinion and it's been made very clear that the way that the court looks at these things that the potential for the future change to be dramatic. Is there and is very real and is is seems to just be a near certainty at this point so you would think the NCAA will have to do. Do something. I can imagine they get this rolling and they sit there and they think they're going to be okay for any extended period of time. I think what what they should do is bring back college football and basketball video games. I think that should be one of their primary priorities. But yeah so you're toward the end of his opinion. Justice Cavanaugh actually suggests that the NCAA should resolve its illegal model through a kind of collective bargaining process with college athletes, so he's actually kinda given in some advice on how to proceed forward and he saying you need to come together with these college athletes you need all get together and you to come to some kind of collective agreement on what's fair and had a kind of proceed and he's basically says that if you don't do this, that the issues that we have with amateurism there that there's that word. The issues we have with amateurism may have to be fixed by either legislation or some future Supreme Court lawsuit is basically given NCAA warning he saying that there's issues with this model they need to be fixed. And if you don't do it NCAA.

We're working to do it for. He's almost daring them to know he is and in inviting people to bring more cases. I think he wants to continue to dunk on this side on the NCAA.

In this manner. I think the last NCAA basketball game I have that I still play is a 2003 game and it's hard to say math like the quality may have was a drop in quality before the series expired but man NCAA, they lose out on some money to the athletes is bring the games back and lets us recoup it that way. That's my professional advice to the NCAA. Not not NCAA videogame, but my Facebook algorithm made the advertisers really figured out how to advertise directly.

Kinda scary how you want to buy everything that Facebook advertises to me but differently mutely football this. I have not but I want to say that Facebook is gotten dialed in that I like video games from like 1988.

I don't know what it whatever the span is in the letters is going to mutely football here is a cartoon your manila is a little little before I've heard it heard of it, but it is a videogame cabinet and they had mutely football, and even play any game and they only charge mutely football.

I don't know why that got it wasn't coming, how many of our listeners played mutely football but was a fun game.

That's the point when Trans Am off-topic Joseph is a good game and I like played yes at EES Josh your passion for mutely football.

I think that the listeners really can feel estimate the radio games back man. If we get nothing from this from this radio show today bring bring the games back and you know we joke but but getting back to the issue at hand. I think in a lot of ways, while a narrow ruling now is basically the end of the NCAA, as we know it and it's gonna kind of gradually become antiquated notion that is is really we may be looking years from now and it it just is a nonexistent thing of the past, something comes along some different model comes along to replace and it doesn't even resemble what we have today is Joe when these elite prospects. When college basketball and football is no longer attractive. These elite prospects and they go to the G league or some sort of minor league football system and to get away from college basketball and football stood at four years eligibility yeah yes if we can if we can if we can filter all the actual athletes at a Kate collegiate play the entire day will come. If you have any questions for us at the show that while I are our phone numbers 100-659-1186 that's 1-800-659-1186.

You can email us at questions@theoutlawlawyer.com would love to hear from you next to Joe. I think the listener question we got a listener question before we take this listener question again.

Josh gave you the contact information and has has basically issued an open challenge to any listener mutely football if you want it with Josh Whitaker give us a call. Shoot us an email and you can get.

I would be willing to play a listener for a cash prize and Facebook live that for everything the same.

I think were we got us with the were to set this up by mentally.

I'd I amply mutely football a long time at all Memphis one player to player so we are in a it will will play if it's one player will go to games against the computer and take appointed directors ways around it. Josh digestible took a break will be right back up next on that will lawyer we've got another listener question we are answering a question about marital interest in real property wanted things. So next I Joseph we love listener questions and then we got one today real quick before you get started. If you have a question for Joe and I our phone number is 1-800-659-1186 that's 100-659-1186 and call that number, leave a message for me and Joe here that will lawyer, or you can leave a message for Whitaker and Hamer that will pass along to the law firm if there's any legal help you need the counsel of an attorney. You can also email us at questions. That's plural questions@theoutlier.com you can also visit us@theoutlier.com all kinds of information on Joe and I the law firm all of our episodes are there for your listening pleasure.

You said Josh we love listener questions. We love hearing from out our listeners. If you ever sit around at home and you're wondering what you what you need to do your board, just pick up your phone and call the outlier ascus literally any question that you have just talked to us.

We just we just love to hear from you, and we'd love to talk to you answer any questions, give us your thoughts so that we have another question kind of is in and it borders on what we call family law and in real estate law, but we got Andrew asking us he's telling us. I bought my house when I was single, but then I met my spouse and we got married.

If I decide to sell the house will my spouse have to sign anything at closing and so what we got here is Andrew bought a house when he was single so he owned some real property as attorneys would say, and he is married now if he entertain selling that property. He is the only one on title we would say he's the only one on the on the deed that conveyed ownership to him answer his question us as if he sells us a spouse have to be involved.

First off, I was once a congratulations to Andrew and his spouse sound like truly lovely people and I wish them the best. But yeah, that's it. It's it's a question we get a lot and there's a lot of confusion. We have clients come in around how marital interest in general affect the real estate closing and how they kind of interplay with with when you sell a property. So in this question Andrew is asking. He bought the house when he was single so he buys this house. It's his property. Eventually he gets married. He has a spouse and then he goes to sell the property and to simply answer Andrew's question, except for a limited number of circumstances which again we could we could get into great detail here, but in the absence of either a prenuptial agreement or some free-trade agreement or some anti-nuptial anti-nuptial agreement.

Andrew spouse is gonna have to sign and join in the execution of this deed is important to note that his spouse may not be entitled to any proceeds from the closing so his spouse's signature will be required to sell the property to his buyer. But I don't think that Andrew and his spouse, or to run into this argument.

I hope they racing for on firm footing.

They and again I wish them the best. That's one of the best things that can happen for a couple but added that always confuses folks when this comes up, especially in a situation or maybe the spouses are separated or maybe the spouses are getting along. Or maybe the spouses just like to keep their finances separate. This is an issue that comes up so usually are proceeds check would be made out to whoever's on the deeds of Andrew, the proceeds check after closing and probably made out to Andrew for him to do with what he would like, but his spouse's signature is still required and that can get messy.

That can get messy and again we can go into great detail because this can be a complex no answer but but for the purposes of this radio show. We want to keep it relatively simple but but you know Andrew's wife while maintenance fees may not be a record owner of this property. She's got what we refer to as a marital interest in this property and you know that it is soon as they're married. That takes effect and it will be in effect until again either. She joins in the execution of the deed or AA could be terminated if the parties divorce and there's a divorce judgment that centered and it could also be resolved again. We talked about a free trader, or if they had entered into a prenup prior to marriage. There's other ways to resolve that interest.

But in the absence of those things she's got that marital interest and it has to be joined or else it hangs out there, and whoever buys this property from Andrew without the joinder of a spouse is going to have a title problem, so it's no more both ways. Either so it takes you.

We say one to buy two to sell so if you're if you're married and you're buying property. There's statute North Carolina that allows you to purchase the property without the signature of your spouse. Now if you're getting mortgage by your lender may want your spouse to join. So there are some ways that law kind can be eclipsed but it's that the general rule that year.

A lot of people say is when about to do so. That is the general rule again like you said, in practice it.

If you're buying a house cash it. It's it's not a matter year. That's the easiest way to go. We encourage all of our listeners to accrue substantial amounts of money and buy everything they can with cash is spent and enlisted your closing but if you got a lender it's good to be lender specific you know legally like Josh said there's a statute that allows you to purchase individually without the joinder of your spouse, but we do a lot of banks we deal with a lot of national banks and some lenders are and are going to put up a fight there and want your spouse to join regardless in the execution, Josh. We talked a little bit about you know prenups and free traders and separation agreement you elaborate a little bit on that. Just to give some background SOA. We see it from time to time with four folks get married, especially if they arty have assets they'll all come together meet with an attorney agree on how they want the property they currently owned, handled, and help after after-acquired once they get married they acquire more property kind define how that's can be handled so he called his prenuptial agreements. If you're watching 80s 90s sitcoms in a timing master prenup that was is the premise of large amount of 80s and 90s sitcoms, but it's not necessarily a bad thing. It can be very smart thing in a lot of situations but go ahead and sit down and say look where bureaucracy were get married want everything to work out were happy were in love, but things don't always work out and you know here's what we want to do that I say will man my boys and have prenuptial agreements. Yeah, your boys will allow drafting for my voice. They're good people. The there there not a bad word you know and and and so there's there's anti-nuptial agreements is a little more complicated but if you're already married and you guys are just thinking about that now you know that after the fact you can kind of the same thing in and in a free trader, which always thought was a cool word to be known as free trader, but you and your spouse as happy as you may be you can go together and get a free trader sign which Tracy allows you to act as if you were single so you can transact business buy and sell real property as if you are an unmarried individual. A lot of people do that as well is an important distinction you can transact business and acquire real property, but not single. You can't just do what you want. That's advice for Andrew in his early to write your answers can stay married forever.

I still get about him yes got a good question. Great clay very perfect writing great guy.

Another there's all you just the thing that I think a lot of people and I wouldn't think about it, necessarily, if I was an attorney that in CDs and we see is when stuff goes bad and and so I give someone advice and are buying a house or in their get married like I give them advice from that perspective I have seen little worse of people in the worst that can happen and we want our clients to to be prepared so you know, prenuptial agreement, long time ago.

Kind of an audio kind of a bad word, bad thing to think about, thought of it like a jinx, but it's it's Mark smart all your kids made everyone have some more kids will do some more prenups, wait for the boys to get over 16 on the story of Moloch give given them all the horror stories your kids turn 16 and just getting a draft prenup study this again if if our law firm can ever be of help to you it's it's Whitaker namer Josh Whitaker Joe Hamer our contact information. As always, is going to be 1-800-659-1186 that's 1-800-659-1186 that will not be alive person talking to you that's good set up free to leave a message for us that we will get the email to us to me and Joe and attorneys reach out to you want to schedule a console we can do that for you if you leave a message for the show. You got a listener question. You know something that you want me and Jerry to address will be happy to do that because 100-659-1180 6R email address questions@theoutlawlawyer.com is also our website to be Debbie W the outlaw lawyer.com. Lots of information.

Therefore, you Joseph. I enjoyed it just always enjoy it. I really it's one of the highlights of my week in my life to come in here into the studio to talk about legal issues with you, and I was very excited today to be able to talk about law intersecting with something else that's near and dear to our hearts college sports. Joseph, the law affects everything will take a look at what happens this week will be back with you next attorney licensed to practice law in North Carolina. Some of the guests appearing on the show maybe licensed North Carolina attorneys discussion of the show is meant to be general in nature and in no way should the discussion be interpreted as legal advice, legal advice can only be rendered once an attorney licensed in the state in which you live. Have the opportunity to discuss the facts of your case with you. The attorneys appearing on the show are speaking in generalities about the law, North Carolina, and how these laws affect aboriginal Carolinian. If you have any questions about the content of the show, contact us directly


Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime