Per ESPN, UM has retained Williams & Connolly
Surprised this hasn't been linked yet on the forum. ESPN is reporting that UM has retained Williams & Connolly for the litigation against the B1G. As any of the Mgolawyers will tell you, you can infer the following from that:
(1) W&C is a big and expensive gun, UM is not kidding around about a nasty legal fight
(2) UM's own investigation probably concluded they have colorable legal arguments: W&C doesn't take on dead-loser cases and nor would you use them if you were going to be throwing hail marys
(3) this is likely (but not certain) to be fought in federal court.
November 8th, 2023 at 10:22 AM ^
I'm going to disagree that Williams & Connolly wouldn't take on a high profile case like this even if it were a "hail mary."
November 8th, 2023 at 10:26 AM ^
They're not big fans of losing unceremoniously, IME. They'll lose but they don't want to look like terrorists.
November 8th, 2023 at 10:30 AM ^
That's totally fair.
November 8th, 2023 at 10:26 AM ^
It looks like OP was implying that you wouldn't hire them for a hail mary, but I couldn't tell you whether that's truly the case.
November 8th, 2023 at 10:30 AM ^
OP clearly says both
November 8th, 2023 at 10:50 AM ^
Then I guess it could be me inferring that there's at least some day-light between "dead-loser cases" and "hail marys."
November 8th, 2023 at 11:52 AM ^
What is their stance on flea flickers?
November 8th, 2023 at 4:51 PM ^
Can they sue ESPN for slander? That would be a glorious takedown.
November 8th, 2023 at 10:27 AM ^
Billables are billables.
November 8th, 2023 at 10:36 AM ^
Yeah, I've seen plenty of cases where big firms take on loser cases. That's not to say that Michigan has a loser case here - just that hiring a big time firm doesn't reflect on the strength of a party's case.
November 8th, 2023 at 10:41 AM ^
Big-time firms seem to have an even better track record of accepting deep-pocketed clients.
Who would have thought?!
November 8th, 2023 at 11:27 AM ^
agreed - sometimes it's the exact opposite.
November 8th, 2023 at 12:06 PM ^
I've seen plenty of cases where big firms take on loser cases.
My thought exactly. The client could know they're up shit's creek and need the big guns to mitigate the damage and, if they're lucky/good, get them out of it completely.
That said, screw the haters.
November 8th, 2023 at 1:32 PM ^
But not necessarily collectible.
November 8th, 2023 at 10:39 AM ^
I came here to post the same thing. Williams and Connolly know exactly what they are getting with Michigan whether it's a win or lose situation. That being $$$$$$$$
November 8th, 2023 at 10:45 AM ^
I think both can be true. No firm is going to turn down a deep pocket client willing to burn cash to fight an issue. However, you don't get to be a high level expensive firm without producing results. Throw in some ingrained "lawyer ego" that we all have and taking on a dead dog loser is not in the firms long term interest.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:30 AM ^
Are you defining dead dog loser as not being able to survive summary judgment and it's obvious? If so, very few cases fit that description there is Rule 11 after all. If there is only a 20% of chance of survival, is that so dead dog loser to turn down the deep pocket high profile client?
November 8th, 2023 at 12:36 PM ^
Most firms will milk a cow as long as the cow wants to be milked. I agree that having a good-faith basis for bringing a case is a low bar and the vast majority of cases brought by any credible firm or lawyer can survive summary judgment. My point was that high profile firms don't become high profile by taking cases with very low rates of positive outcomes. Once you become a high profile firm that anaylsis may change a little, but winning and results is what keeps these firms at the top of the food chain.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:34 AM ^
Yes they like big money, but big firms don't like to lose those big national cases publicly. They likely believe they have a good shot at winning. Losing a big case damages a firms reputation.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:40 AM ^
Not a firm like W&C. Barring gross malpractice, losing this wouldn't dent their reputation at all.
November 8th, 2023 at 10:50 AM ^
So Karsh pointed this out on the radio and given how petty the Big10 seems to be it wouldn’t shock me but what if they suspend Jim on Friday or late Thursday night? Courts will be closed for Vet’s day.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:03 AM ^
I'm more worried about Petitti suspending him for two games the day after psu. That would cover the osu game and it's within his purview to do so without board approval. Not saying a tro or injunction couldn't be done.
My conspiratorial side wonders if they are waiting to see result of psu game. If we lose, do they suspend in fears that us beating osu would possibly lead to no B1G teams in CFP? If we win, maybe they don't suspend in hopes that two teams would make it?
Of course, we could beat osu without JH too. Lots of thoughts, lots of possibilities. Just want this to disappear.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:07 AM ^
Rumor is FoxSports told the BigTen they'll have severe issues with Harbaugh suspended for OSU.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:18 AM ^
If it goes down that road, keep Harbaugh for the OSU game, but have him use the B1G Championship Game to suspend him on, since we would go against an ugly B1G West Champ. Otherwise, the conference can just suck it up and leave Harbaugh alone.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:27 AM ^
Source? LOL. It makes sense but really, source?
November 8th, 2023 at 11:47 AM ^
Buried in another thread is this quote:
I do know some of what Michigan is tracking and let's just say it involves certain programs who are given a different set of rulebooks to follow by the Big 10 as it relates to TV, scheduling, etc.
And I'm trying to figure out what that could mean. So the Big Ten gives OSU favorable TV slots and scheduling? For what purpose?
November 8th, 2023 at 12:48 PM ^
You don't fuck with your cash cow.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:16 AM ^
"We know the NCAA will act slowly," Feldman said. "They may not act in time for there to be a meaningful discipline for the parties that are involved. The idea is it gave them an unfair competitive advantage this year, so you're allowing a team that cheated to maintain that advantage. Should the Big Ten have to wait for a process they know won't play out quickly enough?"
Feldman, whom I normally like, is talking out of his ass here. First, the competitive advantage is debatable at best. Second, Michigan hasn't played anyone this year, remember? Even if there was a competitive advantage, Michigan has won by margins well exceeding that advantage, so there has been no benefit.
Furthermore, as Ghost of Fritz posted, it can be argued that Michigan didn't break any bylaws. Something about differentiating between advanced scouting and recording.
Bottom line, as Klatt said, they, B1G and NCAA, have to allow the investigation to run its course.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:22 AM ^
And just how do we have an advantage when everyone knows this happened, and can make whatever arrangements they need to counter it—like MSU did, having the QB go to the sidelines. For the first couple of series. For performance art.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:50 AM ^
This is the argument that in my opinion is dumb as fuck. "Everyone knew Michigan was cheating so they must be guilty". If "everyone knew" then why didn't they take steps to mitigate the advantage??
November 8th, 2023 at 12:52 PM ^
Been saying this from the beginning. If osu knew, they could've not just mitigated it but completely thrown us off. Switch pass play signs with run play signs. Have us chasing our tails all game.
Either they were too stupid to figure this out. Which, even for bucknuts, seems unlikely. Or, they REALLY got their a$$e$ kicked. We could've won by 50 points.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:27 AM ^
Many of the same coaches at OSU and Rutgers are still in place - how do we know they haven't been doing similar shit to/for other programs? What about their competitive advantage. No one is digging into what the other programs are doing/have done. AND if this is something everyone already knows is going on it seems logical to suggest that the big ten teams we have played adjusted accordingly prior to playing us. If they did not, they should be relegated to the MAC for sheer stupidity, or in Walter's case, hypocrisy. No offense to the MAC.
November 8th, 2023 at 12:00 PM ^
how do we know they haven't been doing similar shit to/for other programs?
And would they do these favors if they didn't also receive some in return?
November 8th, 2023 at 12:43 PM ^
I can't believe people are still trying to press the competitive advantage angle. Based on what we know now, OSU changed their signs last year (so we didn't have them) and they had a bunch of our signs courtesy of Rutgers, others, and as yet unknown sign stealing methods
OSU lost by 3 scores.
If it was such an advantage then how could Michigan have possibly won? Were we 5-6 touchdowns better than Ohio State? Is that what OSU fans are arguing right now?
November 8th, 2023 at 2:32 PM ^
The "competitive advantage" argument has always been a red herring meant to stir up public outrage (and it worked). If any of the coaches/schools believed it was a competitive advantage for Michigan, or that many of them weren't doing something similar, they would have immediately brought it to the ncaa or big 10 for investigation/action. Instead they waited until October of this year.
November 8th, 2023 at 12:17 PM ^
I read in the diary that B1G has to default to NCAA ruling and investigation before their punishment. May be I didn't read the diary correctly.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:19 AM ^
You can find a judge at home to get a TRO. I am sure someone on the Michigan team will have a contact to get that done.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:36 AM ^
This would be viewed by the courts as bad faith action with significant consequences. Only a fool, or a puppet, would follow that course of action.
Ironically, the early season atonement for (alleged) NCAA violations may help the team if this sanction does happen, as they have already rehearsed game day without JH.
November 8th, 2023 at 12:30 PM ^
Its at the same level as OSU twitter saying the B1G would just amend bylaws to allow themselves to put an indefinite suspension in place.
That would be an excellent idea to 1) tacitly admit your actions are not supported. 2) Modify a contract (bylaws) and enforce it in an ex-post facto manner. But only if your primary goal was to give a judge everything they needed to find violations of good faith and fair dealing.
November 8th, 2023 at 10:56 AM ^
W&C will take on a matter from a true winner to a dead loser from Michigan for the same reason we should be great at NIL: the money cannon. W&C just wants to be paid.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:04 AM ^
This is only half true. If they get paid by previously having an outstanding record of victories, then why would they want to take on a losing case? It hurts their monetary value and demand going forward by losing a lot or losing high profile cases. No one would want them, and even the few who did hire them, it would come at a cheap cost.
They want to continue to win. Its good business going forward. I very highly doubt they would take on a big high profile case knowing they would lose. Unless they are ready to retire and cashout i guess.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:17 AM ^
I don't think people look at W-L record specifically when picking a law firm. You care about name/prestige. They of course want to win every case; but in this situation I think they likely looked at the facts of the case + the profile it will help garner + the weight of the checkbook wielded by the client.
November 8th, 2023 at 11:30 AM ^
There are Michigan law alums at W&C. I suspect outrage at the attempted railroading may have played a role in the decision to take the case. Plus, getting a TRO if the league or NCAA violates its own procedures in rushing to a verdict seems like a very good bet. Irreparable harm to Michigan is a given, and in view of the fairly ambiguous nature of the rules, Michigan has a good chance of winning on the merits. The “damage” from the “sign stealing” is contained, so the equities favor Michigan, no opponent going forward will be harmed. Not sure what the precise TRO test is in Michigan, but these factors are typically considered. Moreover, there is a colorable “clean hands” argument in that the people raising this issue have conducted themselves in questionable ways, although the league presumably has not. All these issues and others are surely being researched at this very moment.
November 8th, 2023 at 12:36 PM ^
But if the league is saying they are suspending "pending investigation" are they admitting their action is based on the reports of those potentially implicated parties?
November 8th, 2023 at 11:33 AM ^
you sound like a smart guy making logical arguments that has never practiced law. or you are in law school now. rock on.
November 8th, 2023 at 12:18 PM ^
Big firm lawyers always win, even when they lose. If their client gets a $1 trillion judgment against them, big firm lawyers will say, "without us, it would have been a $100 trillion judgment." Sometimes it's true, sometimes it's spin, but 100% of the time, this is what is said.
November 8th, 2023 at 12:25 PM ^
I know nothing about Williams & Connolly, but I'd be willing to bet that very few of their most recent cases have generated even a fraction of the public notoriety that this case will.
No law firm, regardless of how successful and rich it is, wants to come out on the losing end of such a high-profile case.
November 8th, 2023 at 12:34 PM ^
I just looked them up wondering this myself.
A couple of cases, nothing too big. They represented...
- Barack Obama
- Defended President Clinton's Impeachment
- Represented Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North during Iran-Contra Affair
- John Hinkley, would-be assassin of Ronald Regan
- Vioxx case in United States v Microsoft antitrust trial
- and most recently Elizabeth Holmes in the Theranos trail
Oh, and they're also corporate lawyers for Google, Disney, Samsung, Intel, BoA, and 21st Century Fox.... to name a few.
November 8th, 2023 at 12:45 PM ^
My law firm has worked with W&C (not on any notable case or anything) and they were the awesome attorneys.
November 8th, 2023 at 12:49 PM ^
Welp, I gave myself an "out" with the admittedly vague word "recent"... Clinton, North, Hinkley were decades ago.
I do believe that only a small slice of the general public knows anything about Theranos or the Microsoft trial, whereas millions of even casual sports fans know about SignGate now... but I can imagine that management of W&C doesn't give two shits about the perception of average sports fans sitting in their neighborhood watering holes and flapping their gums about Harbaugh.
Interestingly, they've taken on a number of very high profile cases that (apparently) they lost—North, Hinkley, and Holmes were all convicted, although I don't know if their sentences were lessened because of W&C's representation.