Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Hamilton ex rel. Hamilton v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Ass'n
Hamilton ex rel. Hamilton v. Tenn. Secondary Sch. Athletic Ass'n, 552 F.2d 681 (6th Cir. 1976)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1976-04-08
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- holding that a Memphis student could not prevail on a § 1983 claim challenging the TSSAA’s transfer student policies because participation in interscholastic athletics is outside of the protection of due process
- privilege of participation in interscholastic sports is outside due process protections
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Hamilton ex rel. Hamilton v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Ass'n. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 47 opinions
HAMILTON v. TENN. SECONDARY SCH. ATHLETIC,552 F.2d 681(6th Cir. 1976)
VICTOR HAMILTON, BY HIS NEXT FRIEND, VIRGIL HAMILTON, JR.,
INTERVENOR-APPELLEE, v. TENNESSEE SECONDARY SCHOOL ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION,
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
No. 76-1067.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
April 8, 1976.
Thomas M. Daniel, Memphis Shelby County Legal Services Ass'n, Memphis, Tenn., for intervenor-appellee.
Before PECK, LIVELY and ENGEL, Circuit Judges.
[1] ORDER
[2] This is an appeal by the Tennessee Secondary School Athletic AssociationPage 682(TSSAA) from an order of the district court granting a preliminary injunction enjoining TSSAA from prohibiting the appellee Victor Hamilton from participating in interscholastic athletics on behalf of Memphis Frayser High School.28 U.S.C. § 1292(a). The appellee does not contend that the eligibility rules of TSSAA are invalid. He argues in this court, as he did successfully in the district court, that he was entitled to reasonable notice and a hearing on the issue of whether he had lost his athletic eligibility by transferring from one school in the Memphis school district to another school in the same district in the absence of a change of residence by his parents.
[3] Upon examination of the record the court concludes that the district court abused its discretion in granting a preliminary injunction in this case. This case was brought under42 U.S.C. § 1983and the entire basis for relief was the appellee's assertion that TSSAA had acted in violation of his right to due process of law as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. As the Fifth Circuit stated inMitchell v. Louisiana High School AthleticAssociation,430 F.2d 1155,1157-58(5 Cir. 1970),
For better or worse, the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment does not insulate a citizen from every injury at the hands of the state. "Only those rights, privileges and immunities that are secured by the Constitution of the United States or some Act of Congress are within the protection of the federal courts. Rights, privileges and immunities not derived from the federal Constitution or secured thereby are left exclusively to the protection of the states." [Quoting from 1 W. Barron A. Holtzoff, Federal Practice § 37 at 200 (Wright ed. 1960)]. The privilege of participating in interscholastic athletics must be deemed to fall in the latter category and outside the protection of due process. (citations omitted).
[4] The judgment of the district court is reversed and the cause remanded for such further proceedings as may be required in light of this order.Page 684