State News

UNC asks that McAdoo lawsuit be dropped

Posted September 7, 2011

— The University of North Carolina is asking a judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed by former football player Michael McAdoo.

The Charlotte Observer reported ( the school and Chancellor Holden Thorp filed papers in Durham Superior Court on Tuesday asking that the lawsuit be dropped.

McAdoo sued July 1, after the NCAA ruled him permanently ineligible to play college sports.

Asked Wednesday about the suit, McAdoo said, "I feel I was done wrong. I should go on with this."

A hearing is scheduled Oct. 11.

The university and Thorp argue because McAdoo has signed with the Baltimore Ravens, he voluntarily forfeited his eligibility and no longer has a claim against the school.

McAdoo's lawyer, Noah Huffstetler III, says he is not surprised by the request. Huffstetler has said McAdoo was found guilty of only one of three violations reported to the NCAA.


This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • doug7 Sep 7, 2011

    Good article about this

  • forautumn Sep 7, 2011

    The suit was about his college eligibility.....not his scholarship.

    Once he signed w/agent, his eligibility to play college football became a non-issue.

    So, no need for a lawsuit.

  • HanginTough Sep 7, 2011

    only guilty of three when did guilty stop meaning GUILTY...oh college sports seem to be just like our judical system...

  • postingmyopinion2 Sep 7, 2011

    Great stuff, keep dragging the holes through the mud they created and where they belong, long many this saga continue.......

  • Equinox Bandingo Sep 7, 2011

    The matter before the court is whether Mr. McAdoo was unfairly and illegally deemed ineligible as part of the sacrificial offering to the NCAA to prevent further investigation and penalties. The coach, AD, team, University etc. would certainly want to play an eligible player of his caliber, perhaps after a short suspension if any.

  • Desiderata Sep 7, 2011

    Why I don't like sports .....just like a bad marriage,...things are good if all are getting what they want,,,when they make mistakes,,look out,,, blame is everywhere,suing....teaches these kids so much! NOT!

  • nomorethanthat Sep 7, 2011

    What I don't understand is why institutions don’t put a clause in the scholarship agreement that is signed by the athlete that if he/she commits an offense that makes them ineligible to play that they will have to reimburse the institution for their scholarship.

  • Objective Scientist Sep 7, 2011

    Even after Austin and Little were declared ineligible for their final year Baddour made a "big deal" out of saying that UNC would "honor" their scholarship... in other words, UNC would pay the full cost of tuition, fees, room, food, books, etc. for their senior year even though they would neither practice nor play football for the Tar Heels. IMO... considering what Austin and Little did that was too benevolent for me. Both should have LOST their scholarship. If they did it for Austin and Little I am assuming they also did the same for McAdoo. So... what is his law suit all about? I'm not an attorney, but if McAdoo's eligibility had been restored does that mean he would be on the team and practice and play? He could have regained his eligibility but not allowed back on the team... b/c I do not believe there is any law that mandates a coach must allow an individual to be on any team and to practice and actually play in games - and that seemed to be McAdoo's expectation.

  • Equinox Bandingo Sep 7, 2011

    The Carolina Way.

  • hpr641 Sep 7, 2011

    "The university and Thorp argue because McAdoo has signed with the Baltimore Ravens, he voluntarily forfeited his eligibility and no longer has a claim against the school."

    Oh, how VERY cute, guys. You asked this young man to play football for you in exchange for a scholarship. You rule him ineligible (inappropriately, according to his lawsuit) for the year (his final year), but when he elects to go pro (and successfully signs a pro contract), you're arguing that negates his legal argument???

    Sorry guys - if he does not have a valid legal argument, then he must have been, by definition, a "professional" while playing for you ... so which is it, UNC?