Nonvoting NCAA member argued USC coach’s fate, witness says in trial

LOS ANGELES -- A voting member of the NCAA committee that sanctioned the University of Southern California's football program testified in a jury trial Tuesday that a nonvoting member was allowed to deliberate on penalties that were ultimately levied on then-assistant coach Todd McNair.

McNair, who said he hasn't landed a coaching job since not being re-signed by USC in 2010, is suing the organization for libel. His attorney, Greene Broillet & Wheeler LLP partner Bruce Broillet, has argued thus far before the jury that voting members of the Committee on Infractions were unethically influenced to cast a vote penalizing McNair's alleged involvement in the Reggie Bush benefits scandal. McNair v. the National Collegiate Athletic Association, BC462891 (L.A. Super. Ct., filed June 3, 2011).

Broillet, while questioning committee voting member Brian Halloran, pointed to a letter from committee chairman Paul Dee to USC stating that new member Roscoe Howard would serve "strictly as an observer" in the deliberations. Howard, who testified that McNair misled investigators about his knowledge of payments to Bush, has been criticized by the plaintiff for insinuating himself into deliberations.

"So you're saying the NCAA had a pattern and practice of telling people that someone will be strictly an observer and then they are allowed to partake in deliberations?" said Broillet.

"That would routinely occur with observers, yes," Halloran said.

"Are you saying that what he did in the Todd McNair matter with his emails and his analysis and his participation orally in deliberations, are you saying that in the face of the bylaws, that goes on routinely at the NCAA?" asked Broillet.

"I wouldn't say in the face of the bylaws. It certainly wasn't unusual or anything particularly out of the ordinary. It wasn't unusual for a member of the Committee on Infractions to suggest questions," Halloran said.

Halloran was asked about the contrast in penalties before and after McNair was factored in. Before penalizing McNair, USC was facing a one-year postseason ban and the loss of six scholarships. After implicating McNair: a two-year post-season ban and the loss of 30 scholarships, Broillet said.

NCAA defense attorney Karen Bell of Wilkinson Walsh & Eskovitz objected to the questioning, but Superior Court Judge Frederick Shaller overruled her, stating the evidence was already in the record.

Broillet pointed to an email to Halloran from Rodney Uphoff, a nonvoting member who is also a lawyer, a law professor and was in charge of defending the decision on appeal. In the email, Uphoff wrote, "I think it is best for the two of you to push the argument forward," referring to Howard as well.

"Rodney Uphoff knew you were a voting member of the committee, and he knew he had been advocating too strongly already. So he told you and Roscoe Howard that it would be best for you to push the argument forward, right?" Broillet said.

"That's what it said," Halloran said.

He denied that Uphoff, Howard and infractions director Shepard Cooper were working together to bring the committee around to making a finding against McNair. Under cross-examination, Halloran said he was not influenced by the opinions of Howard or Uphoff.

At times, Halloran gave long-winded answers under cross-examination about the minutiae of NCAA scholarships.

While Halloran was answering a question about deliberations, the judge came to the rescue.

"I think we exceeded the question, so let's ask another," said Shaller.