Author Topic: TASO-UIL Suit Sent Back to Texas State Court System (Read 36394 times)

Arbitrator · « **on:** March 22, 2011, 11:19:59 AM »

Just received word from a very reliable source that the TASO-UIL lawsuit has been effectively sent back to the Texas State Court System from the Austin Federal Court. So exactly where do we go from here?

ornery1 · « **Reply #1 on:** March 22, 2011, 03:40:07 PM »

TXMike · « **Reply #2 on:** March 22, 2011, 04:32:51 PM »

That is where we wanted it. It was UIL who filed to take it to Fed court and then, after it was there, filed to say the fed court had no jurisdiction. Still a long way from being over and with some of the things that have come out since it went to Fed court, it is not going to be as easy for UIL to get it dismissed this time.

Welpe · « **Reply #3 on:** March 22, 2011, 04:34:07 PM »

Hey ornery feeling embarrassed yet? Wanna get away?

www.southwest.com

DallasLJ · « **Reply #4 on:** March 22, 2011, 04:42:26 PM »

Quote from: TXMike on March 22, 2011, 04:32:51 PM

That is where we wanted it. It was UIL who filed to take it to Fed court and then, after it was there, filed to say the fed court had no jurisdiction. Still a long way from being over and with some of the things that have come out since it went to Fed court, it is not going to be as easy for UIL to get it dismissed this time.

What has come out since it went to Fed court?

Headlinesman · « **Reply #5 on:** March 23, 2011, 01:57:20 AM »

The fat lady may not yet be singing, but she's standing up, clearing her throat, and adjusting the microphone. Now that "we" (as TxMike likes to say) are back in state court, what is the legal gameplan for overcoming the sovreign immunity question (and yes, before you even start, I am an attorney)?

TXMike · « **Reply #6 on:** March 23, 2011, 05:54:58 AM »

"We" refers to both parties in the lawsuit because WE are in this together. With or without a lawsuit, UIL and TASO will have to work together to get the job done.

As an aged and learned attorney, you know there are ways to get around the sovereign immunity claim. Although in the current lawsuit, that claim has not even been adjudicated yet. The lawsuit was filed against individuals after the original lawsuit was dismissed over the soverign immunity issue. That lawsuit only named the UIL as a party, unlike the current one which has named some specific individuals.

Further, I am not close enough to the legal work to know, but I suspect there could be thoughts given to appealing the US District Court's ruling to the Fifth Circuit.

DallasLJ · « **Reply #7 on:** March 23, 2011, 07:30:50 AM »

Rather than the lawsuit, I think we should look to some of the legislative efforts. If they get through, they can make the lawsuit unnecessary. The proposed legislation have the benefit of being cost neutral and proposing less government regulation -- something I would think this current legislature would like.

So, I think every pro-TASO member should contact their state rep and state senator and tell them to support the efforts to get the UIL out of the officiating business. Best of all, if successful, we can have resolution by the end of May, Timmons goes away and there is nothing the UIL can do about it.

Etref · « **Reply #8 on:** March 23, 2011, 07:58:57 AM »

Quote from: DallasLJ on March 23, 2011, 07:30:50 AM

Rather than the lawsuit, I think we should look to some of the legislative efforts. If they get through, they can make the lawsuit unnecessary. The proposed legislation have the benefit of being cost neutral and proposing less government regulation -- something I would think this current legislature would like.

So, I think every pro-TASO member should contact their state rep and state senator and tell them to support the efforts to get the UIL out of the officiating business. Best of all, if successful, we can have resolution by the end of May, Timmons goes away and there is nothing the UIL can do about it.

The problem is with either legislation or a court decision you are bound by what some outsider thinks should happen. They do not necessarily know the workings of either organization. Best case scenario is mutual agreement on issues and working together. However, with the current UIL body, I just do not see that as a viable option.

Getting Fat · « **Reply #9 on:** March 23, 2011, 09:14:33 AM »

DallasLJ is right. Also,

"what is the legal gameplan for overcoming the sovereign immunity question (and yes, before you even start, I am an attorney)?"

No sovereign immunity for ultra vires acts: Acts beyond the authority granted by the legislature.

ornery1 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 23, 2011, 01:41:50 PM »

On March 18, 2011, a federal district court in Austin dismissed, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction, a lawsuit filed by the Texas Association of Sports Officials (TASO) against the UIL. The lawsuit had sought to challenge UIL’s authority to amend Section 1204 of UIL’s Constitution and Contest Rules to require that UIL member schools only use sports officials who register with the UIL to officiate their sports contests.

The challenged amendments to the Section 1204 were adopted in November 2009 and January 2010 and were scheduled to go into effect on December 1, 2010. On November 30, 2010, however, the district court issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting UIL from putting the amendments to Section 1204 into effect pending further order from the court. As a result, UIL delayed indefinitely the implementation of the amendments to Section 1204.

In issuing its March 18, 2011, order dismissing TASO’s entire lawsuit, the federal court also vacated the preliminary injunction that had been entered against the UIL. Accordingly, UIL is now able to undertake efforts to implement the November 2009 and January 2010 amendments to Section 1204.

UIL intends to implement the amendments to Section 1204 as expeditiously as possible. Each member school will be notified regarding the requirements and the date of implementation of the amendments as soon as we receive further information.

Etref · « **Reply #11 on:** March 23, 2011, 02:37:13 PM »

I seem to remember that the state court had granted an injunction that is why UIL moved the matter to Fed court.

Getting Fat · « **Reply #12 on:** March 23, 2011, 02:45:13 PM »

You remember the state court has granted a TRO and an injunction...

Keep in mind it's the UIL that wanted the case in Federal Court, not TASO.

Welpe · « **Reply #13 on:** March 23, 2011, 02:46:04 PM »

Is this TRO and injunction still in effect or has it been vacated since the suit was sent to the Federal court?

texref (TX) · « **Reply #14 on:** March 23, 2011, 02:59:18 PM »

From the Executive Director of TASO:

After a series of twists and turns, TASO's lawsuit against the University
Interscholastic League's attempt to register, regulate and control Texas sports
officials is headed back to state district court.

On March 17, a federal district judge in Austin granted the UIL's motion that the
federal court did not have jurisdiction over this dispute. This is ironic since it
was the UIL that moved the case to federal court in the first place. And later,
when TASO offered to move the case back to state court, the UIL officially notified
the TASO legal team that it would oppose such a motion.

The rumor mill is working overtime and there is a lot of misinformation about the
status of the case. Please be clear: The lawsuit is not over and the UIL has not
won.

The federal judge specifically did NOT rule on TASO's central point that the UIL's
Sports Officials Department is beyond the authority that the Texas Legislature has
granted the UIL.

The federal judge's ruling simply means that the case will return to state court
where, in the past, TASO has secured a temporary restraining order and an
injunction against the UIL. We hope for, and anticipate, similar success.

Remember, three separate judges have already prevented the UIL from forcing its
registration requirement on sports officials. TASO is in the process of undertaking
the procedural steps to re-start the case in state court, where it was before the
UIL sought the removal to federal court.

Just as before, there is no requirement to register and TASO remains strong in
every sense of the word.

TASO is 100 percent dedicated to the cause that high school sports officials in
Texas should remain independent and not fall under the control of a bureaucratic
state agency where the individual official has no voice. This independence has
served the high school student athletes in Texas well for almost 80 years.

This is what that we are fighting for, but it does not mean we are unwilling to
continue to work closely with the UIL and private school organizations to create
guidelines, rules and regulations that officials must abide by that are in the best
interest of both officials and Texas schools.

If you have any questions, or if I can be of further assistance, please contact me.

Regards

Mike

Michael Fitch
Executive Director
Texas Association of Sports Officials

TXMike · « **Reply #15 on:** March 23, 2011, 03:17:24 PM »

Quote from: ornery1 on March 23, 2011, 01:41:50 PM

On March 18, 2011, a federal district court in Austin dismissed, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction, a lawsuit filed by the Texas Association of Sports Officials (TASO) against the UIL.

I am assuiming this was a cut and paste job and not original material from you? If so, this comment is even worse than had it come from you. I fully expect you to not have read the fed judge's opinion but whomever penned "your" remarks must not have either and I suspect that would be someone on Manor Rd? The judge did not say the fed court did not have jurisdicton. He said that TASO did not have standing because it is unable to show (yet) any real injury. The court said that because there was no proven "injury" (yet), it is dismissing the case for lack of standing. And since there is no standing, the court declined to exercise jurisdiction over TASO's claims in the case.

Welpe · « **Reply #16 on:** March 23, 2011, 03:44:35 PM »

Mike he copy and pasted right from the UIL website.

http://www.uiltexas.org/athletics/update-on-taso-litigation

Arbitrator · « **Reply #17 on:** March 23, 2011, 05:14:14 PM »

Quote from: Welpe on March 23, 2011, 03:44:35 PM

Mike he copy and pasted right from the UIL website.

http://www.uiltexas.org/athletics/update-on-taso-litigation

Quote from: ornery1 on March 23, 2011, 01:41:50 PM

On March 18, 2011, a federal district court in Austin dismissed, for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction, a lawsuit filed by the Texas Association of Sports Officials (TASO) against the UIL. The lawsuit had sought to challenge UIL’s authority to amend Section 1204 of UIL’s Constitution and Contest Rules to require that UIL member schools only use sports officials who register with the UIL to officiate their sports contests.

The challenged amendments to the Section 1204 were adopted in November 2009 and January 2010 and were scheduled to go into effect on December 1, 2010. On November 30, 2010, however, the district court issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting UIL from putting the amendments to Section 1204 into effect pending further order from the court. As a result, UIL delayed indefinitely the implementation of the amendments to Section 1204.

In issuing its March 18, 2011, order dismissing TASO’s entire lawsuit, the federal court also vacated the preliminary injunction that had been entered against the UIL. Accordingly, UIL is now able to undertake efforts to implement the November 2009 and January 2010 amendments to Section 1204.

UIL intends to implement the amendments to Section 1204 as expeditiously as possible. Each member school will be notified regarding the requirements and the date of implementation of the amendments as soon as we receive further information.

(FIFY)[move]

[move]U I L[move]

I would be highly surprised if the 126th State District Court didn't go ahead and stay the restraining order all ready in place against registration activity by the Manor Road Crowd! JMHO!

WABill · « **Reply #18 on:** March 23, 2011, 07:48:55 PM »

Quote from: ornery1 on March 23, 2011, 01:41:50 PM

On March 18, 2011, a federal district court in Austin dismissed the UIL.

FIFY

blindref757 · « **Reply #19 on:** March 24, 2011, 08:52:29 PM »

When I go work my baseball game tomorrow night, do I get the $85 UIL rate or the $45 TASO Rate?

TXMike · « **Reply #20 on:** March 24, 2011, 08:55:16 PM »

Are you registered with the UIL?

"UIL intends to implement the amendments to Section 1204 as expeditiously as possible. Each member school will be notified regarding the requirements and the date of implementation of the amendments as soon as we receive further information."

I'd say $45

blindref757 · « **Reply #21 on:** March 25, 2011, 06:01:41 AM »

Quote from: TXMike on March 24, 2011, 08:55:16 PM

Are you registered with the UIL?

"UIL intends to implement the amendments to Section 1204 as expeditiously as possible. Each member school will be notified regarding the requirements and the date of implementation of the amendments as soon as we receive further information."

I'd say $45

No...I'm not. I guess I'll just have to drive and hit the school for about $65 in travel and $45 for my services!

blindref757 · « **Reply #22 on:** March 25, 2011, 06:09:00 AM »

Quote from: TXMike on March 24, 2011, 08:55:16 PM

"UIL intends to implement the amendments to Section 1204 as expeditiously as possible. Each member school will be notified regarding the requirements and the date of implementation of the amendments as soon as we receive further information."

I wonder if they will impose a registration deadline that is 1 week prior to playoffs. If so, there won't be any! Taso baseball is very united...there will be a lockout. Surely the Manor road crowd learned from football?

TXMike · « **Reply #23 on:** March 25, 2011, 06:33:37 AM »

We thought football was pretty united also but there were significant numbers of guys who registered in the days leading up to the "deadline" that was eventually quashed.

ETXZebra · « **Reply #24 on:** March 25, 2011, 08:42:14 AM »

Sorry to say, but I think the reality is setting in that TASO does not have the overwhelming loyalty and unity they thought they had. I’m afraid the longer it goes, the worst it will get.

Author Topic: TASO-UIL Suit Sent Back to Texas State Court System (Read 36394 times)

ornery1

Headlinesman

ornery1

WABill