The lawsuit alleges Averette-Brown has missed out on more than $100,000 in potential NIL deals, according to reports from the Columbus Dispatch and other news outlets. The lawsuit is seeking a change in OHSAA bylaws to allow high school student-athletes to be compensated through NIL deals.
“OHSAA’s blanket ban not only singles out Ohio’s high school student-athletes for unequal treatment, but it also unlawfully suppresses their economic liberty, freedom of expression, and restrains competition in the NIL marketplace,” the lawsuit says.
Credit: David Jablonski
Credit: David Jablonski
NIL deals have been authorized in 44 states, plus the District of Columbia, said attorney Luke Fedlam, a partner with Amundsen Davis Law Firm who is representing the family.
“High School student athletes, especially at the elite level, have opportunities to be able to engage in name, image and likeness, but they need to be authorized by their state high school athletic association to be able to do that, and that’s what this lawsuit is all about,” he said.
“When you think about an athlete wanting to perform at the highest level, there’s training costs and recovery costs, and there’s risk that when every day that goes by, especially for football student athletes, and with any student athlete, there’s a risk of injury that could completely change their career.
“And so the time is now for the Ohio High School Athletic Association to be able to allow high school student athletes here in Ohio to be able to earn compensation from their name, image and likeness.”
The lawsuit says Averette-Brown has been offered a trading card deal worth “more than six figures,” Fedlam said.
The lawsuit seeks a temporary restraining order “enjoining OHSAA from enforcing its NIL prohibition (Bylaw 4-10),” as well as an “order requiring OHSAA to permit Ohio high school athletes to participate in NIL opportunities consistent with Ohio law and public policy.”
A hearing is scheduled for Monday, according to the Franklin County Clerk of Courts website.
“The longer Ohio goes without allowing (NIL), the higher, the larger the risk of student athletes, potentially from the state to go to other schools and or other states where name, image and likeness is allowed,” Fedlam said.
Credit: Bryant Billing
Credit: Bryant Billing
Averette-Brown committed to Ohio State earlier this year. He entered spring ranked the No. 1 prospect in Ohio, the No. 1 receiver and the No. 3 prospect overall nationally in 247Sports Composite rankings for the Class of 2027.
The lawsuit does not affect his status to play this week, Fedlam said.
“We’ll be having conversations with OHSAA and look forward to a swift resolution,” Fedlam said.
The lawsuit could result in an emergency referendum vote of OHSAA member schools on the bylaw, according to a press release.
If approved, the referendum would allow OHSAA member schools to shape the bylaw. Currently, the OHSAA is one of only six state associations that does not allow NIL by student-athletes at its member schools.
The OHSAA Board of Directors approved language on NIL to go to member schools next May as part of the annual referendum voting process. However, schools may be asked to vote on the proposal prior to the May voting period due to legal action, as permitted by OHSAA bylaws. Administrators were informed that a proposal on NIL was likely coming during recent regional update meetings.
If passed, the proposed new bylaw would allow student-athletes be compensated through NIL deals through appearances, licensing, social media, endorsements and/or the use of branding based on their public recognition (athletic fame) or notoriety. The proposal would also establish appropriate parameters around these activities so that students do not jeopardize their eligibility as it relates to the OHSAA’s amateur bylaws, the release said.
In 2022, OHSAA member schools voted down the OHSAA’s first NIL proposal by more than a two-to-one margin (538 to 254).
“We have been following this situation closely and have been preparing for this situation,” said Doug Ute, OHSAA Executive Director. “We were hoping this would wait for the referendum voting period in May, but as we told our schools this fall, the vote may have to come sooner than that due to a lawsuit, which would trigger the emergency vote. We are prepared to move forward with our member schools on this issue.”
About the Author
