771 F.Supp.3d 1043
W.D. Wis.2025Background
- Plaintiff Nyzier Fourqurean, a University of Wisconsin football player, seeks a preliminary injunction to prevent the NCAA from enforcing the "Five-Year Rule," which limits college football players to four seasons of competition.
- Fourqurean began his football career at Grand Valley State University (GVSU) in 2020, but that season was canceled due to COVID-19. He qualified for a waiver that preserved his eligibility for that year.
- After his father's death in 2021, Fourqurean faced mental health challenges but still participated in 11 games at GVSU, though his actual play time was limited.
- Division II rules at the time did not offer the same limited-participation exceptions as Division I; changes to the rules came after Fourqurean’s 2021 season.
- Fourqurean transferred to UW, played two seasons, and sought a waiver for an additional season, which the NCAA denied.
- Fourqurean claims loss of significant NIL (Name, Image, Likeness) opportunities and potential draft position if not allowed to play an extra year; he filed suit alleging the NCAA's rule violates the Sherman Act and Wisconsin state law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the NCAA's Five-Year Rule violate § 1 of the Sherman Act? | Rule is an unreasonable restraint of trade harming the market for student-athlete services, especially NIL income. | Five-Year Rule is procompetitive, ties participation to academic progression and amateurism. | Likely violates Sherman Act absent meaningful exceptions for unique circumstances. |
| Has Fourqurean shown irreparable harm? | Failing to grant relief would cause loss of significant NIL opportunity and affect brand/draft status. | Any harm is mitigated by NFL opportunity; delay undermines urgency. | Plaintiff demonstrated irreparable harm; money damages are insufficient. |
| Are traditional legal remedies (damages) adequate? | Damages cannot compensate for unique college football experience and career-building opportunity. | Financial loss can be compensated; other harm is speculative. | Traditional remedies inadequate due to speculative/non-monetary harm. |
| Should a preliminary injunction issue? | Balance of equities and public interest support an injunction narrowly covering his case. | Injunction would flood courts with athlete eligibility disputes. | Injunction granted for Fourqurean, narrowly tailored to his unique circumstances. |
Key Cases Cited
- NCAA v. Alston, 594 U.S. 69 (application of rule-of-reason under Sherman Act to NCAA eligibility rules)
- Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7 (standards for preliminary injunction, including irreparable harm)
- Illinois Republican Party v. Pritzker, 973 F.3d 760 (standard for likelihood of success on the merits in injunction context)
- Ty, Inc. v. Jones Group, Inc., 237 F.3d 891 (delay as a factor in considering irreparable harm)