forums

Wisconsin officially sues Miami over Xavier Lucas

TheOriginalCane said:
I believe so. UW is, as a state university, "the state". Thus the university is not a citizen for diversity. Thus there is no complete diversity. There are cases dealing with this issue, but I have not read them closely to determine if they are older or differ on the facts of the case.
Click to expand...
Got it. Sovereign immunity type of analysis.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
I believe so. UW is, as a state university, "the state". Thus the university is not a citizen for diversity. Thus there is no complete diversity. There are cases dealing with this issue, but I have not read them closely to determine if they are older or differ on the facts of the case.
Click to expand...
I haven’t looked at any cases in a few years either (and I don’t work anymore, so I no longer have Lexis/Westlaw anyway), but this would be an interesting one for the 11th Amendment test. Sure UW is a state entity, but is the university AND the co-plaintiff collective really acting as an “arm of the state” in this situation? Is the signing of a revenue-sharing agreement with athletes something that the co-plaintiffs are doing in furtherance of their status as a “citizen of the state?”

Assuming the law hasn’t substantially changed recently, there’s an argument to be made that this would fall under the exception to the rule.
 
1000085752.jpg

Mateer ain't the only one with Venmo leaks 👀
 
Anyone watch Alex Donno / Locked on Canes update this morning?

Cliff Notes:

Darren Heitner and UM’s attorney say that UW’s accusation of the alleged tampering meeting false and lacking any evidence, which we already suspected. This is the meeting UW is alleging occurred among Mario, Lucas’s family member, and an alumnus booster.

However, the attorneys are saying that UW not only has the dates of this meeting incorrect, they are off by an entire year, and this was a legitimate and legal meeting that happened WHILE LUCAS WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL and was part of his high school recruiting in 2023.

If this is true, and the whole lawsuit was filed based on this, holy ****. But, Lucas did file a declaration in support of these alleged facts and said he is unaware of any visit involving Mario and a UM alumnus to his relative’s house during the dates UW is alleging (2024 date). He also realleged everything about his reasons for transferring, etc. So he is under the penalty of perjury now.

Edit: so this is clearly why they just filed the MTD right away.
 
caneingville said:
Anyone watch Alex Donno / Locked on Canes update this morning?

Cliff Notes:

Darren Heitner and UM’s attorney say that UW’s accusation of the alleged tampering meeting false and lacking any evidence, which we already suspected. This is the meeting UW is alleging occurred among Mario, Lucas’s family member, and an alumnus booster.

However, the attorneys are saying that UW not only has the dates of this meeting incorrect, they are off by an entire year, and this was a legitimate and legal meeting that happened WHILE LUCAS WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL and was part of his high school recruiting in 2023.

If this is true, and the whole lawsuit was filed based on this, holy ****. But, Lucas did file a declaration in support of these alleged facts and said he is unaware of any visit involving Mario and a UM alumnus to his relative’s house during the dates UW is alleging (2024 date). He also realleged everything about his reasons for transferring, etc. So he is under the penalty of perjury now.

Edit: so this is clearly why they just filed the MTD right away.
Click to expand...
hopefully UM has served a Rule 11 motion if the facts alleged in the complaint are demonstrably false.
 
Gransapo said:
How the **** is this still in state court?
Click to expand...


Because there is not complete diversity of parties.

The University of Wisconsin "is the state". As such, they are not a CITIZEN of the state. That ***** with the definiteion of "complete diversity".

Sorry.
 
caneingville said:
Anyone watch Alex Donno / Locked on Canes update this morning?

Cliff Notes:

Darren Heitner and UM’s attorney say that UW’s accusation of the alleged tampering meeting false and lacking any evidence, which we already suspected. This is the meeting UW is alleging occurred among Mario, Lucas’s family member, and an alumnus booster.

However, the attorneys are saying that UW not only has the dates of this meeting incorrect, they are off by an entire year, and this was a legitimate and legal meeting that happened WHILE LUCAS WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL and was part of his high school recruiting in 2023.

If this is true, and the whole lawsuit was filed based on this, holy ****. But, Lucas did file a declaration in support of these alleged facts and said he is unaware of any visit involving Mario and a UM alumnus to his relative’s house during the dates UW is alleging (2024 date). He also realleged everything about his reasons for transferring, etc. So he is under the penalty of perjury now.

Edit: so this is clearly why they just filed the MTD right away.
Click to expand...


From my undercover days (December 2024) on the Wisconsin websites, it seems that all of the Wisconsin information on "a meeting" was gleaned from Xavier's father and/or uncle.

And clearly, the University of Wisconsin was a poor notes-taker.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
From my undercover days (December 2024) on the Wisconsin websites, it seems that all of the Wisconsin information on "a meeting" was gleaned from Xavier's father and/or uncle.

And clearly, the University of Wisconsin was a poor notes-taker.
Click to expand...
Yeah, even from the Complaint, it seemed that their only “evidence” of this meeting was someone allegedly mentioning it during a phone call back in December 2024.

This whole thing is so unbelievably stupid.
 
redcane said:
hopefully UM has served a Rule 11 motion if the facts alleged in the complaint are demonstrably false.
Click to expand...
Well, that one may not be in our best interest. If we can just make it go away and be done with it, then we can move on to football and trying to get out of the ACC.
 
Advertisement
caneingville said:
Anyone watch Alex Donno / Locked on Canes update this morning?

Cliff Notes:

Darren Heitner and UM’s attorney say that UW’s accusation of the alleged tampering meeting false and lacking any evidence, which we already suspected. This is the meeting UW is alleging occurred among Mario, Lucas’s family member, and an alumnus booster.

However, the attorneys are saying that UW not only has the dates of this meeting incorrect, they are off by an entire year, and this was a legitimate and legal meeting that happened WHILE LUCAS WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL and was part of his high school recruiting in 2023.

If this is true, and the whole lawsuit was filed based on this, holy ****. But, Lucas did file a declaration in support of these alleged facts and said he is unaware of any visit involving Mario and a UM alumnus to his relative’s house during the dates UW is alleging (2024 date). He also realleged everything about his reasons for transferring, etc. So he is under the penalty of perjury now.

Edit: so this is clearly why they just filed the MTD right away.
Click to expand...

My unprofessional take listening to it was that Miami is saying the timeline is off (Dec 23 recruiting visit vs Dec 24 super secret tampering visit) and that further puts the burden on UW to prove the tampering visit happened, which they cant. Odds are it won't even get there far though based on what we know was in Miami's motion and UW's apparent lack of knowledge around the law.

I do know one thing, once this is officially dismissed and put to bed, I'm going to be the most obnoxious troll on the internet going after the cheeseheads that thought this case was the biggest trial since OJ.
 
Canes Legacy said:
My unprofessional take listening to it was that Miami is saying the timeline is off (Dec 23 recruiting visit vs Dec 24 super secret tampering visit) and that further puts the burden on UW to prove the tampering visit happened, which they cant. Odds are it won't even get there far though based on what we know was in Miami's motion and UW's apparent lack of knowledge around the law.

I do know one thing, once this is officially dismissed and put to bed, I'm going to be the most obnoxious troll on the internet going after the cheeseheads that thought this case was the biggest trial since OJ.
Click to expand...

Odds they try to refile in Florida once it gets thrown out in Wisconsin?
 
grover said:
Odds they try to refile in Florida once it gets thrown out in Wisconsin?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree with TOC. It would be a waste of time for them to do so, as if it gets dismissed on these grounds, it would get dismissed on the same grounds in Florida. Plus, the Court would be annoyed with them for having done so because it would be frivolous and a waste of time.
 
Canes Legacy said:
My unprofessional take listening to it was that Miami is saying the timeline is off (Dec 23 recruiting visit vs Dec 24 super secret tampering visit) and that further puts the burden on UW to prove the tampering visit happened, which they cant. Odds are it won't even get there far though based on what we know was in Miami's motion and UW's apparent lack of knowledge around the law.

I do know one thing, once this is officially dismissed and put to bed, I'm going to be the most obnoxious troll on the internet going after the cheeseheads that thought this case was the biggest trial since OJ.
Click to expand...
UW filed the Complaint, so yes, they have the burden of proving the facts they are alleging in the Complaint.

Motions to Dismiss are customary in litigation, however. I probably dealt with them in 99% of my cases. There is no guarantee that the judge will rule in our favor even though we know how dumb this is, as the Court may give the case a chance to go through discovery.
 
brcane1 said:
They'd be at some risk in Florida it feels like, curious how you think that would play out.
Click to expand...


I said this earlier, I think the whole case (at least on a "motivation" level) is moot in a couple of weeks. At that point, all of the "theory" about signing the Rev Share agreements months before the House settlement was finalized...would be in the rearview mirror.

So if the case (in Wisconsin) was dismissed, I'm not sure that the Big 10/Wisconsin would feel the need to refile, particularly in a less advantageous forum.

Just to extinguish "bad feelings", I could envision the possibility that Miami makes a modest cash settlement offer, with full secrecy as to the terms and no admission of wrongdoing.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
I said this earlier, I think the whole case (at least on a "motivation" level) is moot in a couple of weeks. At that point, all of the "theory" about signing the Rev Share agreements months before the House settlement was finalized...would be in the rearview mirror.

So if the case (in Wisconsin) was dismissed, I'm not sure that the Big 10/Wisconsin would feel the need to refile, particularly in a less advantageous forum.

Just to extinguish "bad feelings", I could envision the possibility that Miami makes a modest cash settlement offer, with full secrecy as to the terms and no admission of wrongdoing.
Click to expand...
Any opportunity to negotiate B1G entry as part of the settlement?
 
caneingville said:
UW filed the Complaint, so yes, they have the burden of proving the facts they are alleging in the Complaint.

Motions to Dismiss are customary in litigation, however. I probably dealt with them in 99% of my cases. There is no guarantee that the judge will rule in our favor even though we know how dumb this is, as the Court may give the case a chance to go through discovery.
Click to expand...


On the issue of Miami being subject to personal jurisdiction for having "admissions efforts" in Wisconsin, I could see a Wisconsin court being really lazy and allowing the case to go forward based on such laughingly minimal contacts.

But I think it will be much harder to ignore the whole "even if the allegations happened, they happened in Florida". You could ask the judge to simply take judicial notice of THAT glaring detail, and I can't see how a judge could ignore it and allow the case to remain in place.

Again, just my 2 cents.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
On the issue of Miami being subject to personal jurisdiction for having "admissions efforts" in Wisconsin, I could see a Wisconsin court being really lazy and allowing the case to go forward based on such laughingly minimal contacts.

But I think it will be much harder to ignore the whole "even if the allegations happened, they happened in Florida". You could ask the judge to simply take judicial notice of THAT glaring detail, and I can't see how a judge could ignore it and allow the case to remain in place.

Again, just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
I agree with you completely.

But I haven’t seen our MTD, so all I know about it / UM’s argument is a from a podcast that was a he said-he said-he said. And you and I both know very well that state courts sometimes do some weird things sometimes. So I am not ever going to say that the case will 100% get dismissed on this motion. That’s all.

But it should be dismissed on this motion. And the plaintiffs were dumb to ever file it (which we said from the beginning).
 
Back
Top