Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
The Indiana Court of Appeals has affirmed a trial court ruling in favor of the National Collegiate Athletic Association in a case that debated whether the organization had a duty to warn individual student athletes about the risks of football-related head trauma, which can lead to death.
The opinion, written by court of appeals Judge Leanna Weissman on Tuesday, stated that the Indianapolis-based NCAA did not owe former Texas A&M University football player Christopher Riggs, who played during the 1960s, a general duty of protection as a matter of law.
The court determined that the appellants’ assumed duties claim failed because the evidence did not show that there was a direct relationship between the NCAA and Riggs or that there was established reliance on the NCAA for protection from the risks associated with playing college football.
The court also concluded that the NCAA’s alleged failure to implement safety measures designed to minimize risks didn’t increase those risks beyond what risks existed before the organization’s involvement.
Christopher Riggs played at Texas A&M University from 1965 to 1968. After playing college football, Riggs experienced several symptoms of degenerative brain disease.
After he died in 2020, Riggs was found to have had Stage III/IV chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE, which can lead to complications such as severe dementia, depression and impulsive behavior. Such complications can lower life expectancy.
Riggs’ estate filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the NCAA in 2022, claiming his death was the result of the organization failing to adhere to its historic duty to protect student athletes at its member institutions, such as Texas A&M. According to his estate, the organization’s role in regulating college football when Riggs was a player established legal duties to individual athletes.
Court of Appeals Judge Melissa May concurred. Appellate Judge Dana Kenworthy concurred in part and dissented in part, stating that she agrees that the assumed duties claim failed as a matter of law but believes the evidence “leaves the existence of a special relationship between the NCAA and Riggs unclear.”
Arguments in the case took place in late October.
The case is Riggs et al. v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, 25A-CT-571.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.