By Jordan Azcue
Playing college football was Deven Hammond’s dream. After a successful high school career, he accepted an opportunity to play football for LSU.
Playing defensive back for the Southeastern Conference school did not work out as planned, so when University of Southern Mississippi (USM) assistant football coach Dan Disch allegedly “reached out to (Hammond) and invited him to transfer,” Hammond was ready to make the change.
The transfer process was not without challenges. Hammond had to take online classes and sell his vehicle to make ends meet, while waiting for the opportunity to pursue his dream.
But none of those challenges could compare with the one that had confronted him his entire life— Hammond was born with only one kidney.
While Hammond believed he could clear that hurdle, USM allegedly had other ideas and denied him an athletic scholarship, leading to a recently filed lawsuit that claims the school violated federal anti-discrimination statutes.
Hammond’s Lawsuit
Hammond alleged in a complaint that USM was informed about his one kidney and that he had been nevertheless “cleared for all activity without restriction.” Without this clearance, Hammond said he would not have continued to practice and train for the upcoming season at USM.
“I was cleared to play and was practicing and working out and everything for the whole month of June up until the point I went and told the (head athletic trainer) about the situation,” said Hammond. The athletic trainer told the plaintiff that [delete] he had “to stop practicing.” The athletic trainer, allegedly, then took Hammond to a “family medicine doctor who acted as the team physician,” who affirmed the athletic trainer’s decision and pointed to “the liability of his condition,” according to the complaint.
Hammond did not give up. Researching the Sports Medicine Actives and Procedures for USM, Hammond found two policies that he believed weighed in his favor:
First, he could seek a second opinion in matters relating (to his health) and with a written document from said physician, he could be cleared to participate in athletic activities.
Two, a student could sign a waiver that addressed pre-existing conditions, therefore the school would not be liable for further health issues.
On the first point, Hammond obtained a second opinion from a kidney specialist, Dr. Corona, and submitted the opinion with hopes of USM reconsidering his eligibility. But he was blocked again.
On the second point, Hammond’s position is solid, according to his attorneys: “It has been black-letter law since the 1980s that barring a student with one kidney from playing football after he offers to sign a waiver of liability is a violation of federal anti-discrimination laws. Grube v. Bethlehem Area School District, 550 F. Supp 418 (E.D. Pa.. 1982) (a football team’s doctor advised against a student with one kidney playing football, but an expert cleared him to play and the student offered to sign a waiver of liability. The court granted a preliminary injunction because ‘the plaintiff is being deprived of an important right guaranteed by federal legislation.’)
“As one court put it, the purpose of federal anti-trust laws is ‘to permit handicapped individuals to live life as fully as they are able, without paternalistic authorities decided that certain activities are too risky for them.’ Poole v. South Plainfield Board of Education, 490 F.Supp. 948, 953-954 (D.N.J. 1980).”
Hammond also claimed in the lawsuit that USM’s Coach Stock relayed false information to a current player at Middle Tennessee State University, informing the player that Hammond could not play football because he did not pass a physical at USM. Hammond alleged that Coach Stock was not only committing defamation by lying about him not passing the physical, but that it was a violation of HIPAA and FERPA when he disclosed his medical information.
Visit https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4313359-Deven-Hammond-civil-suit.html for the full complaint.
