By Tiffiney Taylor Brittingham, BSW; MSW; MJA & Michael S. Carroll, Ph.D.
The Colorado High School Activities Association (CHSAA) has been named in a racial discrimination lawsuit stemming from a former employee. William Harris, who is African American, claims to have been terminated because of his race. Harris was hired as an assistant basketball coach at Sand Creek High School in Falcon School District 49 in November of 2016. When he was hired, his employment agreement required that he abide by CHSAA Bylaws. During the 2016-2017 season, the Sand Creek High School varsity basketball team violated several CHSAA rules, which led to team infractions and Harris’ eventual termination.
CHSAA Guidelines
CHSAA is a self-policing organization that mandates regulations for high school athletics in Colorado. All members of the organization must be aware of all bylaws, and all infractions are usually self-reported. One of these bylaws is the “transfer rule,” which governs student athletic eligibility after transferring from one high school to another. Students who transfer high schools within the school year are ineligible for varsity play in all sports that the student participated in during the preceding twelve months. The exception to the rule is a “bona fide family move.” A bona fide family move permits full transfer eligibility. CHSAA bylaws specifically state that,
A change in guardianship that requires a transfer, such as a move from a student’s parents’ house to his grandparents’ house, is not considered a bona fide family move. Further, any student who transfers during the school year and whose transfer is “substantially motivated by athletic considerations” is ineligible for varsity competition for a full twelve months. Athletic considerations include transferring to “follow the coach.”
Thus, CHSAA bylaws specifically indicate that a student transferring to a school in which a previous coach is currently working will be deemed motivated by athletic consideration and thus result in ineligibility that season. This includes former coaches, non-school coaches, volunteers, or assistants of any capacity. When seeking an exception to the transfer rule or bona fide family move, the student must submit paperwork or a written waiver application and wait for final approval before participating in sports at the new school. Any student, coach, or athletic program who violates these rules will be sanctioned, which may disallow participation in district, regional, or state-level qualifying athletic events, including state playoff and state championship games.
Transfer Incident
Jared Felice is the Athletic Director at Sand Creek High School who hired William Harris as the Assistant Coach for the Sand Creek High School boys’ basketball team. Harris recommended Robert Hawkins for the Head Coach position, and Felice eventually hired Hawkins as the Head Coach. During the 2016-2017 season, a student player informed Hawkins that his best friend (RM), a well-known player from another school, wanted to transfer to Sand Creek High School and play on the boys’ basketball team. The transfer student’s parents were moving out of state, and the student was moving in with his grandmother.
Paul Angelico was the Commissioner and Chief Administrative Officer of CHSAA. He was notified by Jared Felice of the high-profile player’s transfer and move. Angelico directed Felice to submit proper documents for approval and believed that the new student player could practice with the team before the official paperwork was submitted and approved. However, Felice took the approval to practice by Angelico as a clearance for the student to transfer and participate. In December of 2016, the new student enrolled in school and began practice with the team immediately. However, Harris objected to the new player practicing and joining the team, feeling that the new player’s presence and playing privilege was unfair to the other players. On January 2, 2017, Coach Hawkins allowed the new player to play in a varsity game prior to submitting paperwork and getting approval. After several complaints from the community about the new player’s participation, Angelico advised Felice that the new player’s transfer did not fall under a bona fide move exception.
By January 10, 2017, it was alleged that Harris was involved in “suspicious recruiting allegations.” Harris was well known in the community as a trainer and founder of a youth basketball league called PLUTO Basketball. Felicia questioned Harris about a picture from 2014 that surfaced of Harris and the new student player when Harris coached the new player in his youth basketball league. Also, Harris worked as the trainer to the new student player mid-transfer year. The main concern was that these new findings might indicate that the team violated the follow-the-coach rule.
Since CHSAA is a self-policing organization, the Sand Creek High School Athletics Department complied with a self-reporting letter on January 11, 2017 of incidents that occurred. The letter only addressed Harris’ alleged violations and not the conduct of any other individuals, such as Coach Hawkins allowing the new player to play before approval or that Felice unadvisedly allowed Hawkins to play the new student player. The letter accused Harris of recruiting the new student player after training him at PLUTO Basketball and holding practices on a blackout day when no teams were allowed to practice.
On January 12, 2017, Bert Borgmann, the Assistant Commissioner of CHSAA with particular responsibility for boys’ basketball, answered the self-reporting letter with his determination. Borgmann’s letter stated that Sand Creek would face penalties for violating CHSAA Bylaws by playing a transfer student who had followed his coach. The team would not be able to play in the playoffs, but with a temporary waiver, would be able to participate in the pending post-season basketball competitions if Sand Creek High School Athletics Department submitted a corrective action proposal.
Felice, Sand Creek High School’s Athletic Director, was the primary authority who complied with the self-reporting letter to CHSAA. Felice eliminated his wrongdoings and seemingly placed all blame in the letter on Harris. Felice then told Harris that he could not attend practice or games for safety reasons, not disclosing that it is was for corrective measures. Felice and Hawkins then told Harris to contact the NAACP because he was being targeted because he was black and that things like this “only happened to black coaches.” Felice made it seem as if he was battling CHSAA over the matter and felt that the situation was unfair. Due to the information Felice told Harris, Harris believed at that time that his disciplinary action was racially motivated. Harris was subsequently removed from practice and sat out of two games, and the new student transfer was removed from the team.
Harris’ Termination
On January 20, 2017, Felice requested that CHSAA remove restrictions against the team in two letters. In one letter, he stated that Sand Creek High School would forfeit the January 2 game in which the new student participated and that the new student had been removed from the team. The second letter stated that Harris would be terminated as part of corrective action. Angelico, Commissioner and Chief Administrative Officer of CHSAA, was not aware of Harris’ termination until he received Felice’s letter. CHSAA was concerned about Harris and the new student player’s relationship but did not recommend Harris’ termination.
The Sand Creek Zone Superintendent Sean Dorsey, Falcon District 49 Director of Human Resources, and District Superintendent jointly made the decision to terminate Harris. The group felt that Harris’ termination was necessary to obtain a temporary restriction waiver so that the team could play in post-season competition and had no nothing to do with Harris’s race. CHSAA board members were allegedly not aware of Harris’ race until around January 20, 2017, after reviewing Harris’ youth program webpage that showed pictures of him and the new student player. In a meeting on January 27, 2017, Harris was terminated by Dorsey because of his “prior relationship” with the new student player. However, Hawkins remained employed despite the fact that it was his idea to allow the new student player time on the court before approval.
Case Filing History
In September of 2018, Harris filed a complaint with the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. He filed an amended complaint against CHSAA and various defendants in January of 2019, alleging four claims. In September of 2019, Harris reached a settlement with stipulated dismissal of Falcon District 49, Felice, Hawkins, Dorsey, and Andersen. In February of 2020, Mr. Harris voluntarily dismissed all actions against Angelico. Thus, the case remains against sole defendant CHSAA, consisting of two claims:
Discriminatory treatment because of race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981.
Aiding and abetting race discrimination in violation of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA), Colo. Rev. Stat. § Case 1:18-cv-02310-RBJ.
CHSAA immediately filed for summary judgment on both claims, arguing that it had no contractual relationship with Harris and that he could not prove intentional discrimination. CHSAA further argued that the alleged violation of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act failed because there was no underlying discrimination, and even if there was, CHSAA lacked the intent to discriminate or knowledge of the discrimination. Summary judgment is appropriate only in situations in which “there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact, and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Claims Analysis
U.S.C. § 1981 provides that “all persons . . . shall have the same right . . . to make and enforce contracts . . . as is enjoyed by white citizens” and prohibits racial discrimination in the making and enforcement of contracts. CHSAA argues that it is entitled to summary judgment on this claim because (a) Harris failed to show a contractual relationship between himself and CHSAA, and (b) Harris has not shown that CHSAA held an intent to discriminate on the basis of race.
Despite CHSAA’s assertions, the court found that privity of contract between Harris and CHSAA is not required for the § 1981 claim. Harris’ attorney argued that his at-will employment constitutes a contractual relationship within the meaning of § 1981. Thus, CHSAA is liable “for its discriminatory interference with Harris’ contractual employment relationship with the District.” CHSAA had the authority to intervene and prevent Harris’ termination but failed to do so.
Although Harris provided sufficient evidence, the CHSAA decided to terminate him. He was unable to offer direct evidence that CHSAA intentionally terminated him because of his race and discriminatorily used its authority to interfere with his contractual employment with Falcon District 49. However, direct evidence is not required, and Harris relies on indirect evidence, attempting to establish a prima facie case by a preponderance of the evidence. Intentional racial discrimination can be inferred from differences in treatment when a black plaintiff shows that they were treated differently than a similarly situated white individual. In this case, Harris argues that he was treated differently than Coach Hawkins and Athletic Director Felice, who are both white. The court found that, while Harris and Hawkins were similarly situated, Harris and Felice were not.
CHSAA argued that Hawkins was not terminated because he had no contact with the new student player but that Harris was legitimately terminated because he had a prior relationship and that the prior relationship is what led to the violation of CHSAA’s follow the coach rule. The court found that the termination, predicated upon the rules violation as well as an attempt to lift the restriction on post-season play, constituted a legitimate and nondiscriminatory reason for terminating Harris.
CHSAA may have mistakenly misinterpreted the follow the coach rule that applied to Harris and the new student. CHSAA employees gave conflicting testimony, and witness statements were inconsistent. The Falcon District 49 employees, including Hawkins, Felice, and Dorsey, also made contradictory statements about the reasons for Harris’ termination. The self-reporting letter was inaccurate, and Harris was told that he was being targeted. Harris argues that this amounts to CHSAA using the alleged rules violation as a pretext for his termination.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the court ruled that based on the inconsistent statements over the course of the events at hand, Harris met the burden for summary judgment of showing that a genuine dispute of material fact exists as to whether CHSAA’s stated reason for Harris’ termination was pretextual. Therefore, CHSAA’s motion for summary judgment on Harris’ § 1981 claim was denied. Since Harris stated a § 1981 claim sufficient to survive summary judgment, the court found that he had shown sufficient underlying discrimination to support an aiding and abetting claim under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA).
The court found that intent to discriminate was not necessary, noting that “[t]he conduct proscribed [by CADA] is simply conduct that assists others in their performance of prohibited acts” and that “[w]hen the conduct being assisted is patently discriminatory, one need not have an intent to discriminate to be considered an aider or abettor.”
The court decided that Harris had presented a genuine dispute of material fact regarding CHSAA’s knowledge of the alleged discrimination, and based on those facts, a reasonable jury could find that CHSAA was aware of Falcon District 49’s discrimination against Harris. As mentioned previously, there is considerable disagreement regarding the extent to which CHSAA investigated Harris, the extent to which CHSAA was involved in the termination decision, and the point at which CHSAA learned of Harris’ race. Due to these issues, the court ruled that CHSAA’s motion for summary judgment on Harris’ CADA aiding and abetting claim was denied.
Tiffiney Taylor Brittingham is a Sport Management Ph.D. Student at Troy University specializing in social work and human behavior. She has self-published two theoretical projects available on Amazon. She is a Dubai, United Arab Emirates resident and has developed a luxury handbag company called Borsetta Stivali based out of Dubai, UAE.
Michael S. Carroll is an Associate Professor of Sport Management at Troy University specializing in research related to sport law and risk management in sport and recreation. He serves as Online Program Coordinator for Undergraduate, Graduate, and Doctoral Programs in Sport Management with Troy University. He lives in Orlando, FL.
