By Tori Harrison, of Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis, LLP
In February of 2020, former Southern Methodist University (“SMU”) women’s basketball player, Dai’ja Thomas, filed suit against the university, coach Travis Mays, Dr. John Baker, and the SMU Board of Trustees for an alleged negligently treated knee injury that ultimately culminated in Thomas’s medical disqualification from the program. This lawsuit follows a recent story published by the Dallas Morning News which details the “debilitating culture” that grew within the SMU Women’s Basketball program after the 2017 hiring of Coach Travis Mays. Plaintiff Dai’ja Thomas was one of eight people interviewed for the story.
Dai’ja Thomas joined the SMU Women’s Basketball team in the Fall of 2015 after an award-winning high school basketball career. According to the petition, and the stats contained therein, Thomas’s performance continued on an upward trajectory each year at SMU. By her Sophomore season, Thomas appeared in all 31 games of the season, averaging 6.2 points and 5.1 rebounds per game. Thomas also ranked 2nd on the team in blocks with 44, and picked up two double-doubles.
The conflict at the center of Thomas’s petition begins with SMU’s hiring of new head coach Travis Mays for the 2017-2018 season (Thomas’s junior year). The petition details a bleak culture within the program that arose seemingly as a result of this regime change. Thomas alleges that Mays pitted the Senior players against his personally-recruited freshman class, fueling a divisive environment among the players. Both the petition and the Dallas Morning News article recount a specific incident where Mays, being unsatisfied with the team’s efforts during practice, said to the SMU players, “if you’re not going to compete, you may as well kill yourselves.” This comment was particularly striking because it was well known among the players and coaching staff that a senior player, Klara Bradshaw, had just suffered the loss of her father by suicide.
The petition goes into detail about the program’s culture under Mays, and explains that this culture directly contributed to the primary issue raised in Thomas’s pleading – the exacerbation and negligent treatment of a knee injury during her Junior season. When Thomas injured her knee, she says that she did not receive an MRI, surgery, rest, or rehabilitation. Instead, the team physician, Defendant Dr. John Baker, immediately prescribed and administered steroid shots and fluid drains so she could continue playing. Thomas received these steroid injections and fluid drains before games and at least every two weeks to keep her on the court. Mays allegedly commented to a team parent that he hoped Thomas would “break down so she moves on,” presumably referencing Thomas’s injury. By the end of the season Thomas’s knee did break down and the SMU staff medically disqualified her, resulting in the loss of her scholarship. After her disqualification, Thomas received an MRI which revealed that a significant percentage of the cartilage in her knee was gone, and she would require surgery. Thomas’s orthopedic surgeon also informed her that she would likely need a total knee replacement before the age of 40. According to Thomas, SMU refused to pay for her surgery and rehabilitation.
Now, Thomas brings this lawsuit against SMU, coach Mays, Dr. John Baker, and SMU’s board of trustees asserting causes of action related to the negligent treatment she received while in SMU’s care and control. This case raises interesting questions about the standard of care owed to student athletes by their coaches and universities in a time where questions about what student athletes are owed in general is still being heavily debated. The pressure that Thomas alleges she felt to continue playing through her injury is not a rare occurrence, and is a mindset that is woven into the culture of athletic programs across the country. However, this culture has been under close scrutiny, particularly in light of the discoveries concerning the long-term effects of concussions, and the relatively recent implementation of new head trauma protocols. Therefore, it will be interesting to see how the Texas County Court at Law for Dallas County handles the issues presented in Thomas’s petition. Historically, sports injury negligence cases have been set aside under “assumption of risk” principles, but the evolving awareness on the long term effects of certain injuries and the increasing public sentiment towards supporting student athletes will provide an interesting backdrop to this lawsuit.
