ILNews

IU McKinney dean emeritus taking legal skills to the Olympics

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

After receiving the unexpected invitation to help at the 2014 Olympic Winter Games, Gary Roberts said he did not think about it for more than a second before accepting.

The dean emeritus of the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law will be part of the Court of Arbitration for Sport ad hoc Division which will settle all legal disputes that arise during the games.

Roberts will be one of nine arbitrators who are either lawyers, judges or professors with a specialization in sports law and arbitration.

An expert in the field of sports law, Roberts has 30 years of experience in the niche. He is currently a certified commercial and sports arbitrator with the American Arbitration Association and is a founding member of the board of directors for the International Association of Sports Professionals and Executives.

“There is nothing I can do to cram for the assignment,” Roberts said. “I will bring all of that knowledge and experience to bear, but there isn’t much I could do now to prepare.”

The panel will primarily handle two types of disputes: those concerning an athlete’s eligibility and those about fairness. Eligibility questions may arise from a positive drug test, challenges to an athlete’s country of residence or accusations about an athlete having an unfair competitive advantage. Fairness disputes can crop up from arguments that the rules were not followed, claims the equipment did not function properly or assertions the referees were biased.

Roberts explained many of the cases that come before CAS Ad Hoc Division are very, very important to people who are involved. The decisions could mean the difference between an athlete who has trained for years not being allowed to compete or not receiving a medal.

The rulings of the council will have consequences and could be controversial, Roberts said.

The Olympic Games will start Feb. 7 and conclude Feb. 23.

During the games, Roberts, along with his colleagues, will be on call. When a legal dispute erupts, he explained, he will have two hours to change into his suit and get to the hearing room.

However, when he is not helping to settle cases, Roberts will be allowed to take in any event he wants.

“I’m always joking I’m getting very excited about the curling,” he quipped.
 



 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT