O'Bannon, Jr. v. National Collegiate Athletic Association et al

Filing 499

ORDER by Judge Claudia Wilken ON NCAAS #496 MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/17/2016) Modified on 6/17/2016 (ndrS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

EDWARD O’BANNON, et al.

9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14

No. C 09-3329 CW

Plaintiffs,
ORDER ON NCAA’S
MOTION FOR
CLARIFICATION

v.
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC
ASSOCIATION; ELECTRONIC ARTS
INC.; and COLLEGIATE LICENSING
COMPANY,
Defendants.
________________________________/

15
Defendant National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA),
16
joined by Plaintiffs, asks the Court to clarify its May 20, 2016
17
Order Granting in Part Defendants’ Motion for Stay Without Bond,
18
as to when a portion of the fees and costs awarded would be paid.
19
The Court intended that a portion of the fees and costs be paid if
20
the determination of antitrust liability becomes final, either by
21
denial of certiorari or by Supreme Court affirmance.

The Court

22
amends the order to so clarify.
23
The NCAA also seeks clarification of the Court’s statement
24
that the $9,088,526.38 in fees and costs to be paid in that
25
instance is undisputed.

The Court understands that the NCAA now

26
disputes liability for any fees and costs, even if its antitrust
27
liability stands.
28

However, $9,088,526.38 is the amount to which

1

the NCAA originally asked that Plaintiffs’ fees and costs be

2

reduced.

3

regardless of the ultimate remedy, it is likely that at least that

4

amount will be upheld as reasonable.

5

If the finding of antitrust liability remains,

The NCAA suggests that it is an abuse of the Court’s

6

discretion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(d) to require

7

payment of any portion of the judgment while the appeal is

8

pending.

9

provides a party against whom a judgment has been entered the

However, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(d) simply

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

option of posting a supersedeas bond in lieu of paying an entire

11

judgment while an appeal is pending.

12

both of those options in this case.

13

motion for stay without bond, the Court allowed a third option of

14

a partial stay of the judgment without bond.

15

The NCAA still maintains
In response to the NCAA’s

The NCAA expresses concern regarding its ability to recover

16

any amount paid should the ultimate award of fees and costs be

17

less than $9,088,526.38.

18

amount become payable, it be paid to lead class counsel, Hausfeld

19

LLP.

20

$9,088,526.38 is paid and is later determined to be an

21

overpayment, Hausfeld LLP will be responsible for reimbursing the

22

NCAA, even if the money has been distributed to the various firms

23

representing Plaintiffs.

24

The Court intended that, should the

The Court further clarifies that, in the event that the

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
26
27

Dated: June 17, 2016

CLAUDIA WILKEN
United States District Judge

28
2