The Colorado Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court decision not to grant University of Colorado, Boulder, football student-athlete Jeremy Bloom a preliminary injunction.

In its May 6 decision, the court said Bloom failed to prove the NCAA was arbitrary in applying its rules or that the Association treated Bloom unfairly in denying him a waiver. The court also stated Bloom failed to prove he would most likely win his case.

The court of appeals heard oral arguments April 7 in the appeal related to Bloom's suit against the NCAA. Bloom, who also is a world-class moguls skier, sued the Association for the right to do endorsements and make money to support his skiing endeavors, while still retaining his amateur status so he can play football at Colorado.

"We recognized that, like many others involved in individual professional sports, such as golf, tennis and boxing, professional skiers obtain much of their income from sponsors," the court noted in its unanimous decision. "However, none of the NCAA's bylaws mentions, much less explicitly establishes, a right to receive 'customary income' for a sport.

"To the contrary, the NCAA bylaws prohibit every student-athlete from receiving money for advertisements and endorsements."

Linda Salfrank, the attorney representing the NCAA, said she was pleased with the court's decision.

"This decision affirms that the NCAA can adopt well-reasoned rules and apply those rules uniformly," she said. "It was a quickly issued decision, but well-reasoned."

This current appeal by Bloom was not an appeal of the merits of his case, but rather an appeal of the denial of his request for a preliminary injunction. The case itself has yet to go to trial. Bloom's lawyers had requested that the proceeding be stayed until the appeal was heard.

Salfrank said Bloom now has the right to request that the Court of Appeals reconsider its decision. Should he do that, and the court again rules against him, Bloom has the right to request a review by the Colorado Supreme Court, though the court does not have to take up the case.

"Obviously this appeal was won for review of the decision on preliminary injunction, so Jeremy has the right to go back to the trial court and request a final order on his claims against the NCAA," Salfrank said. "We hope that with this decision from the Court of Appeals, Jeremy will make the right decision and will postpone his endorsement deals until after he has concluded his intercollegiate athletics career."

Bloom previously has said he will begin to take endorsements to fund his pursuit to compete in the Olympics in 2006, despite NCAA rules against such practices.

"It is still my intention to play college football," Bloom said in a statement released after the court's decision. "It is the NCAA's responsibility to determine if I will be eligible for collegiate competition next fall."

Bloom's attorney Peter Rush told the media the court's decision does not preclude a trial.

In July 2002, Colorado requested a waiver that would permit Bloom to play football and pursue any television and film opportunities while a student. The NCAA denied that request and Bloom subsequently filed a lawsuit against the Association. Colorado is a co-defendant in the case.

NCAA regulations state that Bloom may ski professionally and accept benefits, prize awards and complimentary ski equipment provided he does not promote or advertise any commercial product.

Also, he would not violate any regulations if he had previously promoted products, but took steps to discontinue the practice within a reasonable time of becoming a student-athlete. Regulations state Bloom also could continue modeling provided the contract pre-existed his becoming a student-athlete and provided he does not make appearances endorsing the products.

However, NCAA rules state that student-athletes who wish to pursue television roles are not eligible for amateur intercollegiate competition.

Bloom's request for a preliminary injunction was denied in August 2002 by the District Court for Boulder County. That denial, which Bloom asked the court to reconsider, was upheld in October 2002.

An appeal of the trial court decision was filed last fall.

Bloom was not a full-time student at Colorado this spring, having taken time off to compete on the World Cup circuit in skiing. Bloom has said he intends to enroll full time in the fall and intends to play football for the Buffaloes.

* * * *

In another litigation matter, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted the NCAA's motion for summary judgment in an antitrust case filed by various summer basketball camp operators in 2000.

Plaintiffs alleged that the NCAA violated anti-trust law when it adopted legislation that prohibits Division I basketball coaches from coaching or teaching at private camps. The rule also eliminated the time period during which coaches could attend the camps to observe and evaluate prospects. The plaintiffs said the legislation restricted their ability to operate the camps.

Judge Anita Brody, however, accepted the NCAA's argument that the recruiting rules were non-commercial and therefore not subject to antitrust law. The judge said the NCAA was acting in its "paternalistic" capacity of promoting education and preventing young players from being exploited when it enacted the legislation.

"This finding supports the NCAA's position that the rules were enacted in the spirit of promoting amateurism, and with the prospects' best interests in mind," Brody wrote. "The evidence further shows that these justifications are in keeping with the NCAA principles of amateurism and recruiting that aim to promote education and keep student-athletes from professional sports.

"Plaintiffs' argument that the rules are commercial because they impose costs on the camps and affect who can coach and visit the camps is therefore unpersuasive; the Third Circuit test for whether a restraint is commercial or noncommercial is not whether the restraint results in some kind of incidental economic effect."