Nengsu Kenfack, Stamps Todd and Brown: Contract Law in Name, Image and Likeness Deals
Early lawsuits surrounding collegiate athletes’ name, image and likeness (NIL) deals are raising important questions regarding the existence, formation, validity and enforceability of such deals. In an article for DRI’s In-House Defense Quarterly, Shook Partners Brice Nengsu Kenfack and Britta Stamps Todd and Associate Rhakeem Brown said that while NIL rules and regulations are evolving, at their base, they’re like any other contract, and as such, they should consider contract law basics in negotiating deals.
In “Just Another Contract? Contract Law Application to NIL Deals,” they discuss Fanatics v. Harrison, a New York state court case in which a sportswear manufacturer and retailer has sued a newly drafted Arizona Cardinals wide receiver, and Rashada v. Hathcock, a case involving a high school football star recruit. In Rashada, the plaintiff sued the University of Florida’s coaching staff members, a booster and others in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida to enforce an NIL deal allegedly based on an oral agreement.
Nengsu Kenfack, Stamps Todd and Brown said a key takeaway from these early NIL cases is that parties must take the time they need to make sure they’re not overlooking important legal requirements.
“Save the speed for the field, and slow down on the contract negotiations,” they advise.
