Law v. National Collegiate Athletic Association
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
134 F.3d 1010 (1998)
Law and other college basketball coaches (plaintiffs) sued the NCAA (defendant) under section 1 of the Sherman Act, challenging its "restricted earnings coach" rule capping certain Division I entry-level coaches' annual compensation at $16,000; the district court granted the plaintiffs summary judgment on liability and permanently enjoined the rule, and the NCAA appealed, arguing it lacked market power since these coaching positions represented only about 8 percent of all basketball coaching jobs nationwide.
Whether anticompetitive effect is established under a quick look rule of reason analysis when a plaintiff shows that an active, effective horizontal agreement to fix prices exists and that the price set by such an agreement is more favorable to the defendant than would have otherwise resulted from normal operation of market forces.