Arland Bruce has arrived & is practicing w/ Brody Brecht at Ankeny. FINALLY, ON OCTOBER 1, Ruled ELIGIBLE to Play.
- Thread starter Franisdaman
- Start date
One issue will almost certainly be whether the governing body (IHSAA) possesses discretion with respect to eligibility decisions based upon what has been submitted for consideration or whether eligibility is ministerial after certain "boxes have been checked."
Think about it this way, the Iowa DOT possesses no discretion to refuse to provide an Iowa identification card if the applicant brings in the requisite proof of identification. That is "ministerial." No discretion involved at all.
If the IHSAA possesses discretion, then the question becomes whether the governing body abused its discretion in some form or another. I.e. exercising its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious fashion. Alternatively, the Bruce family could argue that the rules are so vague and ambiguous that it does not permit for uniform and consistent rulings.
Either way, the Bruce family will have to demonstrate that (a) they will suffer irreparable harm if a TRO is not issued allowing Bruce to play on Friday and (b) a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of the underlying claim. (a) is easier to demonstrate . . . we don't have time machines which will allow a "re-do;" every game not played cannot be undone. (b) will be the more challenging issue.
If I hired an attorney to represent my kid for any reason and they started posting about it on a public forum, that attorney would no longer be representing my kid. Also, this bizarre battle between hk23 and cytwins is flat out pathetic. They both should be embarrassed by their words and actions.
Why argue with mental midgets? Some Iowa fans just suck. And the fact COVID is not being factored in as extenuating circumstances is ridiculous, as many kids have transferred in from other states and gotten to play.
The fact some Iowa fans are actually rooting for this kid to be ineligible tells you all you need to know about their mental facilities. "Iowa Nice" is such a crock of shit. Pffft.
Iowa people are some of the dumbest, most self-assured people on the planet. I don't know what happened to this state. I love the Hawkeyes, but I'm starting to care less. Many people in this state don't deserve to have a quality football program.
I'm beginning to wonder if Arland is regretting committing to Iowa. With pieces of shit like you for fans, and sadly you're in good company, I wouldn't blame him one bit for de-committing. JFC
LMAO
You are taking the side of a guy who stated a kid from KS played for SEP Friday night when that never happened.
Did they move? They are staying with a family in Ankeny and the mother has stated she will not be here full time.
Yes, it is crazy that people expect kids and their families to follow the rules.
If you are trying to come off as the biggest bitch on this site today, congrats...you've accomplished it.
Need to also let all the ICCSD kids transfer wherever they want and play as well, correct?
Not only should the parent be upset, imagine what the guys boss would be thinking if he knew his employee was doing this.
The rules? They seem pretty ambiguous and arbitrarily enforced. Nobody is going to change anyone's mind, though, so the point is moot. Not something I'll lose any sleep over.
You've been on this board long enough to know it would take a greater effort than that for me to procure "biggest bitch" on this site. And it's not like today is the first day I've commented on some of the fans in the Iowa fan base. You should know. You've suggested to quite a few that they should end their lives in some fashion or another.
Don’t lose sight of the fact that eligibility rules are meant to promote competition, protect those who unquestionably live in a district who may not be able to compete on the field if they lose their position due to a questionable transfer and dissuade “recruiting.”
This isn’t just about whether a former out of state high school senior is being deprived and of a chance to play FB.
Couple of things come to mind with this ruling. First, we don't know all of the details of Bruce's transfer vs some of these other kids. On the surface they may all seem alike but there could be differences and justifiable reasons why it was denied. Second, I'm sure the ihsaa has tons of transfer paperwork that they get at the start of each year and they don't have the resources to vet them and a lot of them just get rubber stamp approval. Since Bruce is a little more high profile, his transfer reason was public knowledge and soley for athletic reasons and since someone might have questioned the legitimacy of it, the iahsaa might have felt obligated to check into more thoroughly than other request and not everything was quite up to par. Finally, the iahsaa has always done things that make you scratch your head.
If a school shut down football and another school didn't. Yeah let them transfer. i have no issue with it in this year. like I said, this isn't your average year.
Like I said, this is one year because of a pandemic and schools not playing. I think people need to be more flexible this year.
I pulled the Petition from Iowa's e-filing site.
So are you Travis or Bradley?
I noticed that you made reference to "A.B." throughout the Petition as you should because he is a minor. However, in paragraph 4(a) of his mother's Affidavit you used his first name when referencing "Arlund's former high school." That's an oversight. Also, isn't his name spelled "Arland" not "Arlund?"
Finally, in Exhibit 3, you attach a copy of the Temporary Guardianship Agreement. You've included the names and birthdates of both minors who remain in Kansas. Shouldn't that information be redacted and not public? You could have filed the unreacted version under seal.
From strictly a "legal analysis" standpoint, do you really think that a lease for $100 will be deemed an arms-length transaction when the landlord is not requiring the lessee to pay for electric, gas, telephone, cable television, water or garbage? The $100/lease payment wouldn't come close to covering those expenses. If a lease isn't deemed to be an arms-length transaction, does that impact the analysis of whether the move is a "good faith" move?
There's nothing in the Petition identifying the relationship between the landlords and Ms. Bruce.
Given the absence of information in the Petition regarding that relationship and the minimal lease payment . . . from an outsider's perspective . . . it smells like a "sweetheart deal" in an effort to bring in a "ringer" for Ankeny's FB prospects this Fall.
EDIT: Forgot to add . . . good draw on Judge Hanson. Smart man. Eminently fair and reasonable.
Last edited:
Interesting information on the lease. The part I still struggle with is if I consider Arland’s scenario with two I’m making up:
- #1- AB’s mom signs a “sweetheart lease agreement” for $100 and gives custody of 2 other kids to a relative. AB and mom move to Iowa.
- #2- Parents with only child or youngest child signs $1,000/mo. lease for 6-months in Iowa. Parents can WFH during pandemic.
- #3- Parents with only child or youngest child buy house in Iowa but keep their house in original state. Parents can WFH during pandemic.
Let’s say that in all 3 scenarios, the family moved after their home state postponed fall football and the kids are on record as wanting to move so they can play football. The differentiating factors seem to be 1) family income, 2) parent ability to WFH, and 3) if they have younger siblings.
Again, I don’t care enough to read through the Iahsaa code but if they are using “bright lines” rules and AB met them, he should get to play even if the lease is BS. I don’t think the Iahsaa should be making judgment calls in those cases. If everything is subject to interpretation, then any kid that said or indicated they are coming for football should be ineligible. Instead, it seems like the Iahsaa has potentially made it so that the wealthier kids can play and the poorer ones can’t when they are both attempting the same thing (a short stint in Iowa for football).
David -
Good post. Your comment about income disparity and the potential for disparate impact is thought provoking.
As for your comment that any kid who said "I'm just coming to Iowa for the Fall semester because of football" . . . I struggle with what should be done. While I certainly understand Arland Bruce's desire to play football, I am simultaneously sympathetic to the person (who may be a Senior and who has put in his sweat and effort into the Ankeny program) displaced simply because a "ringer" chose that particular school district.
I'm not naive. I know what happens with bigger high school programs and the parochial high schools. Despite their assurances otherwise, recruiting happens. Yet, I'd like to think that, when all is said and done, kids residing in a particular high school district play for the local high school and win/lose. The spirit of the rule at issue certainly seems to suggest that creating an exception to the 90 day "sit out" period should be awarded in only the most strict of circumstances and is meant to discourage recruiting.
I guess that's why I was curious regarding the relationship between the Bruces and the family that owns the home in which they are living. Are they friends? Are they distant relatives? Are they friends of friends? How did the Bruces end up there? On its face, it seems like someone may have said "hey . . . they aren't playing football in Kansas, let's see if we can get this University of Iowa recruit to Ankeny to play football to try to land Ankeny a state championship."
And, yes, I sure hope that the IHSAA is subjecting all of the recent out-of-state transfers to the same scrutiny.
Good post. Your comment about income disparity and the potential for disparate impact is thought provoking.
As for your comment that any kid who said "I'm just coming to Iowa for the Fall semester because of football" . . . I struggle with what should be done. While I certainly understand Arland Bruce's desire to play football, I am simultaneously sympathetic to the person (who may be a Senior and who has put in his sweat and effort into the Ankeny program) displaced simply because a "ringer" chose that particular school district.
I'm not naive. I know what happens with bigger high school programs and the parochial high schools. Despite their assurances otherwise, recruiting happens. Yet, I'd like to think that, when all is said and done, kids residing in a particular high school district play for the local high school and win/lose. The spirit of the rule at issue certainly seems to suggest that creating an exception to the 90 day "sit out" period should be awarded in only the most strict of circumstances and is meant to discourage recruiting.
I guess that's why I was curious regarding the relationship between the Bruces and the family that owns the home in which they are living. Are they friends? Are they distant relatives? Are they friends of friends? How did the Bruces end up there? On its face, it seems like someone may have said "hey . . . they aren't playing football in Kansas, let's see if we can get this University of Iowa recruit to Ankeny to play football to try to land Ankeny a state championship."
And, yes, I sure hope that the IHSAA is subjecting all of the recent out-of-state transfers to the same scrutiny.
My goal tomorrow is to get a Hawk recruit eligible. If Aurora the arm chair lawyer is upset or Legend so be it. Aurora how do you actually know about Judge Hanson? He would be happy to know. Someone in Illinois knows what a great Judge he is. And you took the time to read all the pleadings. Good work buddy. Will send you the ruling.
If you ever played Orchard Valley Golf Course, I used to live off of the 16th hole. Transitioned my practice from Chicago to Des Moines 10+ years ago after spending the first 16 in Illinois. I'm a native Iowan and it was good to get back here.
Upon reading these posts today and the Petition, the one thing that stood out to me is whether the IHSAA or their legal counsel was willing to talk to you about the decision making process. A good source informed me that WDM Valley sent a kid (don't know name) back to Colorado because he wasn't eligible. As I posted before, I'd like to think that the IHSAA is applying the same level of scrutiny to all kids transferring into the state.
My practice is primarily focused upon defending product manufacturing clients in venues all over the U.S. but I've defended a few TRO/P.I. requests. I think that you've got the irreparable injury "side" covered well . . . what I don't have a great grasp on is the "substantial likelihood on the merits" side of the equation. That seems to be your bigger hurdle.
I'll be following through EDMS.
I guess I didn't sense your sarcasm in your previous post. My mistake.
Judge Hanson knows me. I know him. I've appeared before him. I don't see him at football games but I sit rather close to him at CHA and we enjoy talking a little bit about the law but primarily about what's happening on the basketball court. And, pre-COVID, he and I would frequently pass one another in the Skywalk and exchange pleasantries.
I can get the ruling off of EDMS.
Good luck with the TRO hearing, Bradley. I don't wish you ill nor do I wish the Bruces ill. You seem to equate someone challenging the merits of what you are arguing as somehow not being a good Hawkeye fan. IMO, that's a garbage "take." If you are being candid with yourself . . . you know damn well that there is a very good chance that Judge Hanson will either raise the same questions that I raised and/or counsel for the IHSAA will raise those same questions/issues.
No hard feelings . . . even happy to buy you a beer at the Radish if you're interested.
Your biggest hurdle is the "substantial likelihood on the merits" argument. I don't think that anyone can reasonably argue against the "inadequate remedy at law" or "irreparable injury" portion of your claim.
If you sense pushback from Judge Hanson on the "substantial likelihood on the merits" portion, you could ask for emergency discovery to be issued to the IHSAA. You could ask it for all the names/circumstances of kids from other states who were allowed to play this year. You could ask for all documents upon which the IHSAA relied in making its decision. Given that the next game is Friday, you'd need them by close of business on Wednesday. Then I'd ask Judge Hanson to order the IHSAA to make a representative available for deposition on Thursday morning and to schedule a hearing on the merits for either Thursday afternoon or, more likely, Friday morning. Blame the need for discovery on the IHSAA's lack of transparency.
When IHSAA's counsel pushes back on the time requests (as he/she would likely do), then you could offer something to the effect of: "OK Judge. There should be no harm to the IHSAA to agree to allow Arland Bruce to compete on Friday. The IHSAA can then produce its documents within one week - next Tuesday - and produce a witness for deposition a day or two after the documents have been produced. The court can then take up the matter of converting the TRO - allowing Arland to play on Friday - to a preliminary injunction hearing as to whether he should be allowed to play while the administrative review is happening."
Simultaneously, you'd need to keep an ear to the ground on the administrative side to see what, if anything, can be done to reverse the IHSAA's decision. From what I can gather (albeit from a distance) . . . if you win the TRO and/or get a P.I. but lose the Administrative Appeal decision, that's not the desired end game.
EDIT: You might also load up on some Iowa case law on the issue of how much weight a court should place on the "substantial likelihood on the merits" issue compared to "irreparable harm" / "inadequate remedy at law" issues. If memory serves, there may be some Iowa case law which holds that the latter issues carry more weight than the former. And, for now, the former is your strength (without knowing more about the decision rendered by the IHSAA).
Jade Arroyo was the kid who tried to go to Valley but who moved back which was actually 2 weeks before the season began. In part it was determined by the Valley AD it would be hard to get him cleared by IHSAA and based on the rules in Colorado he would not have been eligible for his senior year since he was on a junior.
Aurora no Ill will at all. Look just trying to do my job. As you know, not always easy. And Arland is a super nice kid. That’ doesn’t mean he will be eligible. The hearing is at 9. I am guessing will get an indication if not ruling then. I really didn’t like the hate from a couple people but understood. Legend doesn’t count since he previously said he was happy my Mom died. That is bad. But Aurora you did a great breakdown of what we need to prove as an exception and to get an injunction. And yes an uphill battle and your points were well taken. Thought of most but not all you raised.
Aurora - I have done these a lot. But did like your clear breakdown. It was basically the same analysis I did. And my argument tomorrow is basically going to track that. As you well know, gonna try and quickly jump the first hurdle and get into the equitable part.
Why does anyone waste their breathe on this Legend tool? He is a complete jerk.
How does it work from here? Do they give you an approximate time you have to wait? What would be the next step if it went in your favor? What would be the next step if it did not go in your favor?
Judge Hanson is great and a huge Hawk fan, hopefully his Hawk fandom gives him a little bias in this situation.
Legend - if the injunction is granted Arland will be playing. If not there is an appeal process. My guess is the decision will be made in short order. As it is a public record I will say I was shocked the Association actually argued that he gets to practice and play JV games so no harm. That basically concedes he can play just not “varsity.” Bad tactics in my opinion. But I am not very smart.
