## Facts

- Chad Ganden, a highly recruited high-school swimmer, committed to swim at Michigan State University.
- Ganden had a documented learning disability diagnosed at the end of his junior year of high school.
- Before diagnosis, his cumulative GPA through junior year was about 2.09; after accommodations and an individualized learning plan, his senior-year GPA was about 3.0, but his cumulative GPA rose only to about 2.136.
- NCAA Division I initial-eligibility rules required completion of 13 core high-school courses and a minimum core-course GPA of 2.275 (as applied through NCAA’s eligibility formula).
- Ganden completed 11 of the required 13 core courses.
- Michigan State sought an NCAA waiver based on Ganden’s learning disability.
- The NCAA subcommittee allowed certain additional non-traditional courses to count as core courses so Ganden could meet the 13-course requirement, but his core-course GPA remained below 2.275.
- The NCAA classified Ganden as a “partial qualifier,” allowing him to receive athletic aid and practice but barring him from competition during his freshman year.
- Ganden sought further modifications (additional course reclassification to increase his core-course GPA), which the NCAA declined.
- Ganden sued the NCAA and moved for a preliminary injunction to permit freshman-year competition.

## Issues

1. Whether the NCAA is subject to Title III of the ADA as an entity that operates, controls, or provides access to services and privileges offered in places of public accommodation through intercollegiate athletics.
2. Whether the NCAA’s core-course and core-GPA requirements, and its waiver decisions, constituted unlawful disability discrimination by using eligibility criteria that screen out or tend to screen out individuals with disabilities under 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(i).
3. Whether the requested relief—treating Ganden as fully eligible to compete notwithstanding noncompliance with the core-GPA threshold—was a reasonable modification or instead would materially change the eligibility program beyond what Title III requires.
4. Whether Ganden satisfied the requirements for a preliminary injunction, including likelihood of success, irreparable harm, balance of harms, and public interest.

## Decision

- The court issued a written decision resolving Ganden’s motion for a preliminary injunction under the traditional equitable factors.
- On the record presented, the court analyzed (a) Title III coverage of the NCAA in connection with intercollegiate athletics and (b) whether additional deviations from NCAA eligibility rules were required as a reasonable modification.
- Publicly available summaries do not reliably establish whether the court ultimately granted or denied the injunction.

## Legal Principles

- Title III prohibits disability discrimination in the full and equal enjoyment of services, facilities, privileges, and advantages of a place of public accommodation by an entity that owns, leases, or operates such a place.
- Discrimination under Title III includes the use of eligibility criteria that screen out or tend to screen out individuals with disabilities, unless justified under the statute.
- Title III may require reasonable modifications of policies, practices, or procedures for qualified individuals with disabilities, but it does not require changes that would amount to a fundamental alteration of the relevant program.
- Preliminary injunctive relief requires a showing of likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm absent relief, a favorable balance of harms, and consistency with the public interest.

## Conclusion

The court addressed, at the preliminary-injunction stage, whether Title III applied to the NCAA’s enforcement of initial-eligibility rules and whether additional disability-based modifications beyond the NCAA’s waiver actions were required to allow a learning-disabled student-athlete to compete, applying standard equitable criteria to the requested relief.


Ganden v. Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n, No. 96 C 6953, 1996 WL 680000 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 21, 1996)