Michigan State’s ousting of head football coach Mel Tucker last year in the wake of a sexual harassment scandal is now at the heart of Tucker’s civil rights, breach of contract and defamation lawsuit against his former employer.
Last Wednesday, Michigan State and members of its administration and board of trustees motioned to dismiss the lawsuit, which asserts Tucker suffered “hundreds of millions of dollars” in damages. Two days later, U.S. District Judge Paul L. Maloney said he read the defendants’ motion and, without expressing a view on the motion’s merits, the Michigan-based judge gave Tucker the “opportunity to cure” alleged inadequacies by filing an amended complaint.
More from Sportico.com
Tucker sued in July, accusing the school and its leaders of acting against him “on the basis of his race.” The 52-year-old says the defendants destroyed “the career of one of the most prominent and successful Black head coaches in college football.” Michigan State fired Tucker after he was accused of inappropriate conduct by a university vendor, national sexual assault victims rights advocate Brenda Tracy. During a phone call with Tracy in 2022, Tucker reportedly masturbated; Tucker insisted he was engaged in consensual “phone sex.”
Through Rita M. Glavin and other attorneys, Tucker maintains Michigan State’s leaders conspired to manipulate and interfere with a “supposedly independent” investigation into his alleged misconduct. He says they were motivated to empower the university to “weaponize” investigative procedures and terminate him for cause. The “for cause” designation meant the school was relieved of paying Tucker about $80 million remaining on the 10-year, $95 million contract he signed in 2021. The deal made Tucker, who won the Big Ten Coach of the Year award in 2021, the highest paid black coach in college football history.
The contract contained a provision that said the school could terminate the deal for cause if Tucker engaged in “any conduct” which constituted “moral turpitude” or which, in Michigan State’s “reasonable judgment,” would “tend to bring disrespect, contempt, or ridicule upon the University.” The school determined Tucker’s conduct triggered this clause.
But as Tucker sees it, Michigan State used what he described as an “entirely mutual, private event between two adults living at opposite ends of the country” to manufacture “transparently pretextual grounds” as a ruse to save $80 million. He also maintains the school treated his “white counterparts”—specifically former head football coach Mark Dantonio and current head men’s basketball coach Tom Izzo—much more favorably when their programs faced “far more serious allegations.” Tucker references sexual assault accusations brought against Spartans football players while Dantonio was the coach and alleged recruiting violations, but the school stood by Dantonio and continued to employ him as an advisor after he retired in 2020. Izzo’s program also faced allegations of sexual and violent incidents, but Izzo was retained.
As argued by Terri L. Chase and other attorneys from Jones Day and Zausmer, Michigan State contends Tucker’s lawsuit fails to state plausible claims. The school maintains Tucker’s due process claims are invalid since his employment contract determined the process he was owed. To that point, Michigan State cites precedent from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit for the proposition that “the availability of a state breach-of-contract remedy defeats the due-process claim.”
Michigan State also contends Tucker’s conspiracy claim is intercepted by basic legal doctrine. The school stresses that conspiracy claims require pleading with specificity while Tucker’s complaint “offers nothing more than conclusory allegations.”
The school is also dismissive of Tucker’s contention that he is the victim of race discrimination. Michigan State argues that Tucker being black “does not by itself” establish an inference of discrimination, “especially” when “the most obvious explanation” for his firing was not race but rather “his own admitted misconduct.” The school also points out that Tucker’s complaint repeatedly refers to the school firing him “for financial reasons” as opposed to racial ones.
Michigan State further maintains Tucker fails to offer a plausible breach claim because the termination clause explicitly empowered the school to determine in its own “reasonable judgment” whether Tucker engaged in misconduct. The school says the provision “does not allow a court to second-guess that determination.”
Michigan State adds that even if its determination were reviewable, it was easily justified. Tucker, the school contends, engaged in “misconduct towards a sex-abuse survivor and trainer who had been retained to provide sexual-misconduct training to the football team that he coached.” Tucker also “admitted” (as the school puts it) that he made comments regarding Tracy’s “appearance” and partook in extramarital “flirtation.” Further, the scandal brought “public disrespect, contempt, and ridicule upon the University.”
The case could remain at the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan for a while. Whether and when Tucker’s coaching career resumes remains to be seen. He was previously head coach for one season at the University of Colorado and defensive coordinator for the Jacksonville Jaguars and Chicago Bears. Until the scandal he was regarded as a rising star in the coaching ranks. The Spartans, who are now coached by Jonathan Smith, are 4-4 (2-3 in the Big Ten) thus far in the 2024 season. The team lost to the Michigan Wolverines on Saturday.
Best of Sportico.com
Sign up for Sportico’s Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.