'In late February, the NCAA had the case removed to federal court under a variety of procedural grounds.
On Monday, the NCAA said the case should be thrown out, in part, because it did not owe the plaintiffs a duty to prevent academic fraud at UNC.
The NCAA argued that even though "it supplies and enforces rules and guidelines for various aspects of intercollegiate athletics," it is not "subject to liability for the independent actions of its member institutions."
"In addition to claiming that the case is barred by the 11th Amendment, which limits suits against state governments in state courts, the university said the case was brought after expiration of the state's three-year limit for the filing of a breach-of-contract claim.
USAToday
On Monday, the NCAA said the case should be thrown out, in part, because it did not owe the plaintiffs a duty to prevent academic fraud at UNC.
The NCAA argued that even though "it supplies and enforces rules and guidelines for various aspects of intercollegiate athletics," it is not "subject to liability for the independent actions of its member institutions."
"In addition to claiming that the case is barred by the 11th Amendment, which limits suits against state governments in state courts, the university said the case was brought after expiration of the state's three-year limit for the filing of a breach-of-contract claim.
USAToday
