7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

1/14

James Keady v. Nike, Inc and

St. Johns University

KEADY V. NIKE, INC. and ST. JOHNS UNIVERSITY, 116 F. Supp. 2d

428 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), 23 Fed. Appx. 29 (2nd Cir. 2001).

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

2/14

Background Information

James Keady was a graduate assistant at St.Johns University.

St Johns University is Americas leading

Catholic University (founded in 1870)

Nike, Inc was founded in 1971 and is the

worldwide leader in athletic apparel.

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTb_zwwsZIPUEAJW.JzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTBqZDFlYmxzBHBvcwMxNgRzZWMDc3IEdnRpZAM-/SIG=1huijp3bs/EXP=1221071984/**http%3A//images.search.yahoo.com/images/view%3Fback=http%253A%252F%252Fimages.search.yahoo.com%252Fsearch%252Fimages%253Fp%253DNike%252BLogo%2526fr%253Dyfp-t-501%2526ei%253Dutf-8%2526js%253D1%2526x%253Dwrt%26w=200%26h=111%26imgurl=www.kalamazookingdom.com%252Fimgs%252FKingdom_Reserves%252FUNIFORMS%252Fnike-logo.jpg%26rurl=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.kalamazookingdom.com%252FKingdom_Reserves%252FUNIFORMS%26size=6.5kB%26name=nike-logo.jpg%26p=Nike%2BLogo%26type=JPG%26oid=77e926e431d63954%26no=16%26tt=22,834%26sigr=11ptflvgi%26sigi=12583e1kl%26sigb=12p08mljihttp://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTb_hwwcZI5DgBtxKJzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTBxZ2kxMmFsBHBvcwM0BHNlYwNzcgR2dGlkA0kwOTJfMTEz/SIG=1j26n371t/EXP=1221071600/**http%3A//images.search.yahoo.com/images/view%3Fback=http%253A%252F%252Fimages.search.yahoo.com%252Fsearch%252Fimages%253Fp%253DSt%252BJohn%252527s%252BLogo%2526js%253D1%2526ni%253D20%2526ei%253Dutf-8%2526fr%253Dyfp-t-501%2526xargs%253D0%2526pstart%253D1%2526b%253D1%26w=780%26h=697%26imgurl=logoshak.com%252F%257Easgsport%252Fimages%252FSt.John%2527s.gif%26rurl=http%253A%252F%252Flogoshak.com%252F%257Easgsport%252Fshak.html%26size=65.6kB%26name=St.John%2527s.gif%26p=St%2BJohn%2527s%2BLogo%26type=gif%26oid=ef5c322351f440dc%26no=4%26tt=819%26sigr=117stb7g1%26sigi=11b85g9nq%26sigb=13l5ttcgm

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

3/14

Procedural History

Keady filed suit in the Southern District Court

of New York.

The District Court dismissed all counts brought

forth.

The case was appealed by the plaintiff to the

United States Court of Appeals 2nd Circuit.

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

4/14

Key Terms

Defamation

Conspiracy

Breach of Contract

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

5/14

Key Facts

James Keady brought suit claiming he was

forced to resign from his position in the

Athletic Department at St. Johns University

because he failed to wear Nike clothing, whilehe was employed with the university.

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

6/14

ISSUE

Should one be fired or forced to resign for not

wearing a specific brand of clothing?

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

7/14

Plaintiffs Arguments

He does not want to wear the apparel

because he did not agree with their labor

practices.

Nike was pressuring St Johns to discredithim and take other steps to stop him from

speaking against Nike and force him to wear

the clothing or resign.

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

8/14

Defendants Arguments

The plaintiff agreed to perform his duties

diligently and cooperatively, for 20 hours

a weekin a scholarly and efficient manner.

The plaintiff can be terminated by certainuniversity officials at any time if, in their

judgment plaintiff failed to perform any of the

foregoing provisions of this agreement.

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

9/14

Other Cases Used

Feinstein v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.

Liability does not exist in a vacuum; there must

be a showing of some damage ...

Broome v. Biondi

Dismissing defamation claim where it did not

identify with precision who at defendant companymade the alleged statements, at what times or

places, and to whom the statements were made

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

10/14

Holdings

District Court held that plaintiff failed to state claims

under any federal civil rights statutes on which he

relied or under state law for discrimination,

defamation or breach of contract. United States Court of Appeals Affirmed the

decision of the District Court except its

determination that supplemental jurisdiction was

warranted. The District Court was instructed todismiss plaintiff's state law claims without prejudice.

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

11/14

Rationale

A plaintiff must allege (i) a false and

defamatory statement of fact, (ii) of or

concerning the plaintiff, (iii) publication to a

third party, and (iv) injury to the plaintiff as aresult.

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

12/14

Rationale (continued)

Plaintiff alleges a series of defamatory

statements without identifying the substance

of those statements, by whom they were

made, or to whom they were communicated. In addition, plaintiff does not allege that any

damages or other loss, including monetary

loss, resulted from his resignation

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

13/14

Future Implications

Writing contracts that

include an apparel clause.

When signing with an

outfitter for exclusivity,what employees need to

abide by this?

Recording phone calls toCYA.

7/28/2019 nikeppt-12537345424941-phpapp02

14/14