The Florida Supreme Court has agreed to consider arguments in the ongoing litigation between the family of Ereck Plancher and the University of Central Florida Athletics Association (UCFAA). Plancher collapsed and died in March of 2008, after participating in an offseason workout supervised by the University of Central Florida (UCF) coaching staff.
In the months after his death, it was determined that the 19-year-old carried the sickle-cell trait, a condition that could have contributed to his tragic death. During intense activity, the trait can hamper the body’s ability to distribute oxygen, resulting in malformation, or “sickling,” of cells in the heart, lungs, liver, spleen, pancreas, kidneys, adrenal glands, and thymus.
On March 12, 2009, Enock and Giselle Plancher filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against the UCFAA and UCF board of trustees on behalf of their son. During a trial, the family successfully argued that the coaches and athletic trainers were negligent in the treatment of their son, and were awarded a $10 million verdict.
Circuit Judge Robert M. Evans ruled that the UCFAA, not UCF, was liable for the $10 million verdict. This was significant because UCFAA, which runs the athletic department, is not a state agency eligible for the $200,000 cap on settlement claims, as proscribed by Florida law for state agencies.
On appeal, the UCFAA successfully argued before the Fifth District Court of Appeal that it was controlled by the university, and thus protected by sovereign immunity and the aforementioned cap. Among its successful arguments was that the association was created by UCF, as well as supported financially and controlled by the university. It also pointed out that student fees and loans account for the majority of UCFAA’s budget. The appeals court slashed the award to the Planchers, who subsequently appealed.
In a statement, UCF spokesperson Grant Heston said the university “believes the opinion from the Fifth District Court of Appeal was thoughtful and well-reasoned. We are hopeful the Florida Supreme Court will uphold that opinion, one that is of great importance to public universities in Florida.”
UCF has plenty of support from other public universities in the state. In fact, every school in Florida has lined up in support of the argument that “athletic-association direct-support organizations” should be eligible for sovereign immunity.
Regardless of how the high court rules, Eugene Egdorf of The Lanier Law Firm in Houston, recently noted to Sports Litigation Alert that there are lessons to be learned from the incident. “The UCFAA is only appealing the lack of immunity finding, NOT the negligence finding,” he said.
