The appeals court said a district court judge ruled correctly in denying the petition, which would have been burdensome and caused untimely delay, stating "the proposed amendment would essentially force the NCAA to begin litigating this case again."

In March 1999, a federal district court judge declared the NCAA's initial-eligibility rules invalid. The NCAA received a stay of the ruling the same month, and in December 1999, the Third Circuit reversed the lower court's ruling, allowing the NCAA's initial-eligibility rules to remain in place. The appeals court said the NCAA was not a recipient of federal funds and therefore not subject to Title VI scrutiny. The plaintiffs then sought to amend their complaint to assert intentional discrimination on the part of NCAA.

"The decision ends the plaintiffs' attempt to argue deliberate discrimination," said Elsa Cole, NCAA general counsel. "The appeals court said the NCAA's intent in creating the test-score standard had been characterized by the plaintiffs as 'laudable' and that the trial court termed our intent 'legitimate.' "

Several weeks ago, a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in an Alabama case, known as Alexander v. Sandoval, said that only the government, not private individuals, could sue alleging disparate impact under Title VI.

"The plaintiffs' original disparate-impact argument has been ended by the recent Sandoval decision," said Cole. "This decision brings the Cureton case to an end."

In its decision issued May 17, the appeals court concluded that the district court correctly denied the plaintiffs' petition to amend their claim to assert intentional discrimination.

The court stated, "The district court concluded that the new claim fundamentally altered the proceeding and could have been asserted earlier. We find no error in the district court's conclusions."

A second group of plaintiffs, Kelly Pryor and Warren Spivey, filed a similar lawsuit against the NCAA in June 2000. The plaintiffs have asserted that the NCAA intentionally discriminates against African-American student-athletes because of its minimum grade-point average requirement and fails to provide reasonable accommodations to learning-disabled student-athletes. That case awaits decision at the federal district court level in Pennsylvania.

The NCAA's current initial-eligibility standards, in effect since August 1, 1996, require that entering Division I freshmen graduate from high school, successfully complete at least 13 core academic courses and achieve a grade-point average and test score on the ACT or SAT based on a qualifier index to gain eligibility.

"We adopted these standards in an effort to improve graduation rates, which continue to be a concern," said Cole. "The decision by the appeals court allows us to move our focus from defending laudable and legitimate standards to additional ways to support the degree goals of student-athletes."