Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Ass'n v. Cox

Decision Date06 March 1968
Citation221 Tenn. 164,425 S.W.2d 597,25 McCanless 164
Parties, 221 Tenn. 164 TENNESSEE SECONDARY SCHOOL ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION, W. M. Davis and A. F. Bridges, Petitioners, v. Harvey Reid COX, by Next Friend, R. F. Cox, Respondent. TENNESSEE SECONDARY SCHOOL ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION, W. M. Davis and A. F. Bridges, Petitioners, v. Judson NEWMAN, by Next Friend, Wallace Newman, Respondent.
CourtTennessee Supreme Court

Thomas Wardlaw Steele, Nashville, for petitioners; Gullett, Steele, Sanford & White, Nashville, and Foster D. Arnett, Knoxville, of counsel.

Thomas R. Emerson, Knoxville, for respondents; Banks, Smith, Emerson & Daniel, Knoxville, of counsel.

OPINION

CHATTIN, Justice.

The respondent, Judson Newman, filed an original bill against petitioners, Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association and others, on September 1, 1967, in the Chancery Court of Knox County.

The bill alleged the Association has formulated a set of rules, the pertinent sections of which are quoted as follows:

'A student who atends a private, parochial, or public technical school and participates in athletics cannot transfer to another school within the territory served by these schools without losing his eligibility for a period of twelve months--even though there is a change of residence.

'Except for the eligibility rules in regard to age and to the number of semesters in school, the Board of Control shall have authority to set aside the effect of any eligibility rule upon an individual student when in its opinion the rule fails to accomplish the purpose for which it is intended, or when the rule works an undue hardship upon the student.

'Requests for the consideration of such exceptions shall be acted upon by the Board of Control only twice during each school year--at the fall meeting held the latter part of August and at the January meeting.

'The conditions causing the student to fail to meet the eligibility requirements must have been beyond the control of the school, the student and or his parents, and such that none of them could have reasonably been expected to comply with the rule the violation of which is involved.'

He alleged he had been a boarding student at Baylor School, a private boarding school in Chattanooga, for the past two years. That his family had moved from their former residence in Knoxville to an area in Knox County served by Carter High School.

It was alleged during the past year his family had suffered many hardships. There had been, and still was, much serious illness in the family; and complainant was needed at home. And, because of large expenditures resulting from the illness, it was impossible for complainant to return to Baylor School.

Whereupon, complainant registered as a senior at Carter High School for the ensuing year and the Executive Secretary of the Association was notified of the registration.

It was then alleged the Executive Secretary notified the school officials of Carter High School Newman could not engage in football at that school because he was transferring from Baylor.

It was further alleged the Executive Secretary had been contacted several times and requested to grant a hearing to Newman on an application for a waiver of the Associations's eligibility rule. That the Executive Secretary had refused the relief by replying the Board of Control met on August 19, 1967, and would not meet again until January, 1968.

It was alleged the action of the Association was harsh, arbitrary, unlawful, and was causing him irreparable harm for the following reasons:

'Carter High School is not within the same territory served by Baylor School of Chattanooga, as required by Section 13 of the defendant Association's rule.

'The Board did not meet in the latter part of August, 1967, but met on August 19, 1967. The Board knew, or should have known, that this early meeting would deprive students of a hearing when they registered for the school year in the latter part of August, 1967.

'The complainant's case is a true bona fide hardship case within the meaning of the rules and regulations.

'The complainant will be deprived of his right to play football during his senior year, unless immediate relief is granted.'

Complainant prayed:

'That the defendants be immediately enjoined from enforcing the rules herein described until further orders of the court and upon hearing of this cause on its merits the injunction be made permanent.

'That complainant be permitted to participate in the Carter High School athletic program without any further hindrances from the defendant TSSAA.'

Harvey Reid Cox likewise filed a bill in the Chancery Court of Knox County on September 1, 1967. He alleged he had been a boarding student at Castle Heights Military Academy in Lebanon, Tennessee, where he played football. That he lives in an area of Knoxville served by Powell High School and has registered to attend that school during the ensuing year.

By way of amendment, he further alleged:

'He was advised by defendant, A. F. Bridges, Executive Secretary of Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association, that if he had gone to West High School in Knoxville, Tennessee instead of Powell High School in Knox County, Tennessee, he would be eligible to participate in the athletic activities of West High School.'

The remaining allegations and prayer of the bill are identical to those alleged in the bill filed by Newman.

On the filing of the bills the Chancellor issued a fiat ordering the Association to appear before him on September 8, 1967, and show cause why the injunctions should not be issued as prayed.

Thereafter, the Association filed a demurrer, coupled with a sworn answer, to each bill. There was also filed with the pleadings certain exhibits which support the answer.

The issue raised by the pleadings was whether the Chancery Court had jurisdiction to intervene in the internal affairs of the Association and enjoin the enforcement of its eligibility rules for the benefit of the individual complainants.

The Chancellor heard the matter upon the original bills of complainants and exhibits thereto, the demurrer coupled with an answer of defendants and exhibits filed thereto, and argument of Counsel.

The Chancellor granted a temporary injunction in each case and set the matter for final hearing on October 23, 1967.

Thereafter, petitioners, Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association; W. M. Davis, a member of the Board of Control of the Association; and A. F. Bridges, Executive Secretary of the Association; presented to a member of this Court their petitions for the common law writs of certiorari and supersedeas seeking to supersede the interlocutory orders of the Chancellor granting the temporary injunctions. The writs were granted reversing and superseding the decrees complained of, ordering the clerk of this Court to file the petitions, transcripts and briefs and to place the matter on the docket for the January Term 1968, for final hearing before this Court.

The matters were argued at the Bar of this Court on January 10, 1968.

It is the insistence of respondents the Association, through its Board of Control, acted arbitrarily, capriciously, and unreasonably in refusing to allow respondents to participate in athletics at their respective schools by application of its hardship rules. Respondents also insist the Chancellor had jurisdiction to intervene in the controversy and grant the relief sought.

It is shown in the record Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association is a voluntary association comprised of secondary schools in the State. Most of the secondary schools in the State are members. Its purpose is to stimulate and regulate the athletic programs of its members.

The rules and regulations by which the purpose of the Association is accomplished are, under the constitution of the Association, fixed by its Legislative Council, which consists of one representative from each Athletic District and which functions as the legislative or policy making body of the Association. These rules are set out in the by-laws of the Association.

The administrative authority of the Association is vested in a Board of Control; which, also, consists of one representative from each Athletic District, which Board is responsible for the general administration of the affairs of the Association; and, also acts as 'a final court of appeals.'

Under the by-laws, regular meetings of the Board of Control are held in January, March and August of each year.

The Board of Control, and only that Board, has authority to waive eligibility rules. The consideration of such waiver must be acted upon by the Board of Control only twice during each year; that is, 'at the fall meeting held the latter part of August and at the January meeting.' The Board has no authority to waive this rule.

A handbook of the Association, containing its constitution, by-laws, rules and interpretations is distributed annually to its members.

The Association publishes a monthly news bulletin which is distributed to its members, including the schools involved in these cases. In June, 1967, the Association released a news bulletin in which it gave notice the Board of Control would meet on August 19, 1967, in Nashville at nine A.M., to consider hardship cases, with instructions to its members to file such applications with supporting information prior thereto.

The record shows fifteen applications for waiver of eligibility rules were filed and considered at this meeting. Some were granted and some were denied.

The record shows that on August 16, 1967, the principal of Carter High School filed a registration of eligibility form with the Association in which it was reported complainant, Newman, had transferred to Carter High School. The Association received this communication on August 18, 1967.

Neither the officials of Carter High School nor Newman made application to the Board of Control for a waiver of eligibility rules.

The principal of Carter High School...

To continue reading

Request your trial
33 cases
  • Bailey v. Truby
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • July 11, 1984
    ...Bruce v. South Carolina High School League, 258 S.C. 546, 551-52, 189 S.E.2d 817, 819 (1972); Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association v. Cox, 221 Tenn. 164, 176, 425 S.W.2d 597, 602 (1968); Sullivan v. University Interscholastic League, 599 S.W.2d 860, 863 (Tex.Civ.App.1980), aff'd ......
  • Ryan v. Cif-Sds
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • December 24, 2001
    ...PA Inter. Ath. Ass'n v. Great. Johnstown Sch. (1983) 76 Pa. Cmwlth. 65, 463 A.2d 1198, 1201-1202; Tennessee Secondary Sch. Athletic Ass'n v. Cox (1968) 221 Term. 164, 425 S.W.2d 597, 602; Spring Branch I.S.D. v. Stamos (Tex.1985) 695 S.W.2d 556, 561; Sullivan v. University Interscholastic L......
  • K. L. v. Mo. State High Sch. Activities Ass'n
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri
    • April 8, 2016
    ...250, (Ind.Sup.Ct.1959) ; Morrison v. Roberts , 183 Okla. 359, 82 P.2d 1023 (Sup.Ct.1938) ; Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association v. Cox , 221 Tenn. 164, 425 S.W.2d 597 (Tenn.Sup.Ct.1968) ; State ex. rel. West Virginia Secondary School Activities Commission v. Oakley , 152 W.Va. 53......
  • Barnhorst v. Mo. State High Sch. Activities Ass'n
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Missouri
    • December 16, 1980
    ...accord Kentucky High School Athletic Ass'n v. Hopkins County Bd. of Educ., 552 S.W.2d at 687-88; Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Ass'n v. Cox, 221 Tenn. 164, 425 S.W.2d 597, 602 (1968). Finally, the Court notes that plaintiff's claim of arbitrariness, unreasonableness and capriciousness......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT