New Law Office has filed a lawsuit on behalf of 11 Marshall University student-athletes challenging the NCAA’s new eligibility rules. The complaint was filed July 6, 2026 in Cabell Circuit Court (case no. 26-C-315) and has been assigned to Circuit Judge Sean K. Hammers. Our firm’s Steve New is representing the athletes along with co-counsel Dusty Gwinn of Akers Gwinn.
“I look forward to the court hearing our argument and attempting to get justice for these Marshall student-athletes,” attorney Steve New told The West Virginia Record.
Below is a plain-English explanation of what the case is about and what the athletes are asking the court to do. The lawsuit’s allegations are claims that the court has not yet decided.
What the case is about
On June 23, 2026, the NCAA approved an overhaul of its Division I eligibility rules, allowing athletes to compete in five seasons over five years — up from the longstanding “four seasons in five years” limit (the “Five-Year Rule”). Under the old rule, a fifth year could generally be used only as a redshirt season with limited or no competition.
According to the complaint, the NCAA then carved out an exception that affects only one group: athletes who graduated high school in 2022 and used up four seasons of competition (without a redshirt) by the 2025-26 season. The 11 Marshall athletes fall in that class. They argue they are still within five years of first enrolling in college and should receive the same fifth season the NCAA is giving every other class.
The suit also points to a separate NCAA change that lets certain former professional basketball players return to college and compete without losing eligibility for their pro seasons — while, the complaint says, the 2022 class is denied a comparable accommodation for far less significant college competition.
What the athletes are asking for
The athletes are seeking injunctive relief so they can:
- compete for the Thundering Herd during the 2026-27 season, and
- sign scholarship, revenue-sharing, and name, image and likeness (NIL) agreements tied to that season.
The plaintiffs compete across football, baseball, men’s and women’s soccer, women’s tennis, women’s basketball, softball, and women’s cross country. Two of the plaintiffs helped Marshall’s women’s basketball team win the Women’s NIT earlier this year. Because Marshall and other schools are finalizing 2026-27 rosters now, the complaint asks the court to act quickly to prevent what it calls “immediate and irreparable harm.”
The legal claims
The lawsuit raises several theories under West Virginia law, including:
- Breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The complaint frames the NCAA’s Constitution and Bylaws as a contract among the association and its member schools (including Marshall) and argues the athletes are intended third-party beneficiaries. It alleges the NCAA used its discretionary waiver authority (Bylaw 12.6.6) in a “selective and inconsistent” way — benefiting former pro players while excluding the 2022 class.
- West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act. The suit alleges that the NCAA’s reversal on amateurism — after decades of telling athletes that competing professionally would end their college eligibility — is an unfair or deceptive practice.
- Estoppel and detrimental reliance. The athletes say they enrolled right after high school and passed up professional opportunities in reliance on the NCAA’s longstanding representations.
The complaint cites the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in NCAA v. Alston, which subjected NCAA compensation rules to antitrust “rule of reason” scrutiny and recognized that the NCAA’s idea of amateurism has changed over time. It also references a related West Virginia challenge, Robinson v. NCAA, involving WVU athletes.
Why it matters
College athletics has changed dramatically with revenue-sharing and NIL. For these athletes, a fifth season is not just about playing time — it can mean scholarship support, revenue-sharing payments, NIL income, and additional exposure. The lawsuit argues that the relief requested “does not require the NCAA to take any affirmative action”; it would simply stop the NCAA from enforcing the eligibility limit (and the “Rule of Restitution”) against the players and Marshall.
The Marshall athletes are not alone: last month, 15 basketball players filed a similar suit in Ohio. In response to that case, the NCAA argued that allowing a fifth year would “create chaos” and “throw the collegiate athletic landscape into turmoil.”
Talk to New Law Office
New Law Office proudly represents West Virginians — including Marshall University student-athletes — in high-stakes disputes. If you are a student-athlete affected by NCAA eligibility, NIL, or revenue-sharing issues, or if you have another legal matter in West Virginia, contact our office for a confidential consultation.
Frequently asked questions
What did the NCAA change about eligibility?
On June 23, 2026, the NCAA approved letting Division I athletes compete in five seasons over five years, replacing the old limit of four seasons of competition within a five-year window.
Why are the Marshall athletes suing?
The complaint alleges the NCAA excluded athletes who graduated high school in 2022 (and used four seasons without a redshirt) from the new five-season rule while extending favorable treatment to other groups — which the suit says breaches the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and violates West Virginia’s consumer protection law.
What are the athletes asking the court to do?
They are asking for an injunction allowing them to play for Marshall in 2026-27 and to sign scholarship, revenue-sharing, and NIL agreements, plus declaratory relief, court costs, and attorney fees.
Original reporting: legalnewsline.com.