Vondran Legal® Sports Attorney: The New NIL Litigation Trend That Could Reshape College Sports

By Attorney Steve® | Vondran Legal®

For decades, universities portrayed student-athletes as amateur participants competing for school pride, scholarships, and educational opportunities.

Today, however, the NIL era has transformed college athletics into a multi-billion-dollar marketplace where athletes routinely sign contracts worth hundreds of thousands—or even millions—of dollars.

As a result, a surprising legal trend has emerged:

Universities, university-affiliated collectives, and athletic programs are increasingly finding themselves in court against their own athletes.

What began as a movement designed to empower athletes has now evolved into a legal battleground involving breach of contract claims, transfer portal disputes, NIL compensation agreements, recruiting inducements, and allegations of tampering.

The question many lawyers are now asking is:

Can a university sue a student-athlete for leaving?

The answer may increasingly be "yes."

The NIL Era Has Created Enforceable Contracts

Prior to NIL, athlete-school relationships were largely governed by:

• Scholarship agreements

• NCAA regulations

• Conference rules

• Team policies

Today, many athletes also sign:

• NIL licensing agreements

• Revenue-sharing contracts

• Collective agreements

• Marketing contracts

• Endorsement deals

• Promotional services agreements

As contract values rise, schools and collectives are becoming more willing to enforce those agreements through litigation.

The Duke University v. Darian Mensah Dispute

Perhaps the most widely discussed example involves Duke quarterback Darian Mensah.

According to reports, Duke filed suit after Mensah allegedly sought to transfer despite being subject to a multi-year NIL agreement. Duke argued that the athlete had entered into a binding contract granting NIL rights and providing promotional services obligations extending beyond a single season.

The lawsuit immediately sent shockwaves through college athletics because it raised a question never fully tested before:

Can an NIL agreement effectively prevent an athlete from transferring?

Athletes and their attorneys argue that NIL contracts should not operate as de facto non-compete agreements.

Schools argue that contracts must mean something if institutions are investing millions of dollars into athlete compensation arrangements.

The outcome of cases like Mensah may help determine how enforceable NIL agreements become in the transfer portal era.

Wisconsin and Its NIL Collective Sue Over Transfer Activity

Another major example involves the University of Wisconsin and its affiliated NIL collective.

Wisconsin and VC Connect filed suit alleging that the University of Miami improperly induced a football player to break a binding NIL agreement and transfer. The lawsuit alleges interference with contractual relations and improper recruiting conduct in the NIL marketplace.

While the athlete was not the only target of the litigation, the case reflects a growing willingness by institutions to use courts rather than NCAA enforcement mechanisms.

This may be the future of college athletics:

Contract disputes replacing NCAA investigations.

Why Schools Are Going to Court

Universities and collectives often argue that NIL agreements involve substantial financial commitments.

When an athlete receives:

• Up-front compensation

• Signing bonuses

• Marketing opportunities

• Housing benefits

• Revenue-sharing payments

the institution may contend that it bargained for a long-term relationship.

When an athlete enters the transfer portal shortly thereafter, schools may argue they suffered:

• Financial damages

• Lost marketing opportunities

• Recruiting harm

• Reputational injury

In response, some institutions are turning to courts to enforce contracts.

Athletes Say These Lawsuits Threaten Player Mobility

Athletes and player advocates view these lawsuits differently.

Many argue that schools spent decades insisting athletes were not employees and should not be treated like professionals.

Now that athletes have greater economic leverage, critics contend universities are attempting to impose restrictions that resemble employment contracts.

Common athlete arguments include:

• NIL contracts should not function as non-compete agreements.

• Transfer rights should remain protected.

• Schools should not be allowed to restrain athlete movement.

• NIL compensation should not create involuntary service obligations.

These arguments may become increasingly important as courts analyze NIL agreements under traditional contract principles.

The Transfer Portal Is Driving Much of the Litigation

A recurring theme in NIL lawsuits is the transfer portal.

Common disputes include:

Failure to Complete Contract Term

An athlete receives compensation but leaves before the contract expires.

Clawback Provisions

Schools seek repayment of compensation previously paid.

Revenue Sharing Disputes

Questions arise concerning earned versus unearned compensation.

Specific Performance Claims

Schools attempt to prevent athletes from transferring or competing elsewhere.

Injunction Requests

Institutions seek emergency court orders preserving contractual rights.

These issues barely existed before NIL.

Today, they are becoming increasingly common.

What About Collective Agreements?

Many NIL contracts are not technically signed by universities.

Instead, agreements are often executed through:

• NIL collectives

• Booster organizations

• Marketing companies

• Licensing entities

This structure creates additional legal complexity.

Schools frequently argue they are separate from collectives.

Athletes often argue the opposite.

In litigation, courts may examine:

• Funding sources

• Operational control

• Recruiting involvement

• Coordination between schools and collectives

The distinction could determine liability in future cases.

The Jaden Rashada Litigation Shows the Other Side of the Coin

While some schools and collectives are pursuing athletes, athletes are also suing schools and school-affiliated actors.

One of the most significant NIL lawsuits involved quarterback Jaden Rashada, who alleged that University of Florida representatives, coaches, and boosters induced him to commit based on promises of a massive NIL package that allegedly never materialized. A federal court allowed key fraud claims to proceed before the matter later settled.

The Rashada litigation demonstrates that NIL disputes can cut both ways:

• Athletes sue over broken promises.

• Schools sue over broken contracts.

• Collectives sue over transfers.

• Sponsors sue over performance obligations.

The result is an increasingly active NIL litigation landscape.

Could These Cases Turn Athletes Into Employees?

One of the most interesting legal questions involves employment status.

When schools:

• Pay athletes directly;

• Enforce long-term contracts;

• Restrict transfers;

• Seek damages for departures;

courts may begin asking whether the relationship resembles employment rather than amateur participation.

Although courts have not yet definitively resolved this issue, many legal scholars believe NIL litigation could accelerate future employee-status debates.

Key Legal Claims Emerging in NIL Lawsuits

The most common causes of action include:

Breach of Contract

Alleged violation of NIL agreements.

Fraud

Misrepresentations regarding compensation opportunities.

Promissory Estoppel

Reliance on recruiting promises.

Tortious Interference

Claims that another school induced contract breaches.

Unjust Enrichment

Retention of benefits without fulfilling obligations.

Declaratory Relief

Requests for judicial interpretation of NIL agreements.

What Student-Athletes Should Do Before Signing

Before signing any NIL agreement, athletes should carefully review:

✓ Transfer portal restrictions

✓ Repayment obligations

✓ Clawback provisions

✓ Termination rights

✓ Exclusivity clauses

✓ Arbitration requirements

✓ Injunctive relief provisions

✓ Choice-of-law clauses

A contract that appears simple may contain provisions that become critical if the athlete later transfers schools.

Final Thoughts

The NIL era has fundamentally changed the legal relationship between universities and athletes.

What was once governed primarily by NCAA rules is now increasingly governed by contracts—and contracts often lead to lawsuits.

Whether the dispute involves Duke and Darian Mensah, Wisconsin and transfer-related NIL agreements, or the high-profile Jaden Rashada litigation, one thing is clear:

The future of college sports may be decided as much in courtrooms as on football fields and basketball courts.

As NIL compensation continues to grow, athletes should expect greater scrutiny of the contracts they sign—and greater willingness by schools, collectives, and sponsors to enforce those agreements through litigation.

Need Help Reviewing an NIL Contract?

Vondran Legal® represents student-athletes, agents, collectives, sponsors, and businesses in NIL contract review, transfer portal disputes, breach of contract litigation, intellectual property matters, and sports law issues.

Contact Attorney Steve® for a confidential consultation before signing or terminating an NIL agreement.