IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

THOMAS BAKER, individually and on behalf 

of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC 

ASSOCIATION,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:20-cv-846

COMPLAINT

CLASS ACTION

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff Thomas Baker, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, brings 

this Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial against Defendant National Collegiate 

Athletic Association (“NCAA”) to obtain redress for injuries sustained a result of Defendant’s

reckless disregard for the health and safety of generations of Alcorn State University (“Alcorn”) 

student-athletes. Plaintiff alleges as follows upon personal knowledge as to himself and his own 

acts and experiences and, as to all other matters, upon information and belief, including 

investigation conducted by his attorneys.

INTRODUCTION

1. Nearly one hundred thousand student-athletes sign up to compete in college 

football each year, and it’s no surprise why. Football is America’s sport and Plaintiff and a Class 

of football players (defined below) were raised to live and breathe the game. During football 

season, there are entire days of the week that millions of Americans dedicate to watching the 

game. On game days, hundreds of thousands of fans fill stadium seats and even more watch 

around the world. Before each game, these players—often mere teenagers—are riled up and told 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 1 of 31 PageID #:1
2

to do whatever it takes to win and, when playing, are motivated to do whatever it takes to keep 

going.

2. But up until 2010, Defendant NCAA kept players and the public in the dark about 

an epidemic that was slowly killing college athletes. 

3. During the course of a college football season, athletes absorb more than 1,000 

impacts greater than 10 Gs (gravitational force) and, worse yet, the majority of football-related 

hits to the head exceed 20 Gs, with some approaching 100 Gs. To put this in perspective, if you 

drove your car into a wall at twenty-five miles per hour and weren’t wearing a seatbelt, the force 

of you hitting the windshield would be around 100 Gs. Thus, each season these 18, 19, 20, and 

21-year-old student-athletes are subjected to repeated car accidents.

4. Over time, the repetitive and violent impacts to players’ heads led to repeated 

concussions that severely increased their risks of long-term brain injuries, including memory 

loss, dementia, depression, Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (“CTE”), Parkinson’s disease, 

and other related symptoms. Meaning, long after they played their last game, they are left with a 

series of neurological events that could slowly strangle their brains.

5. For decades, Defendant NCAA knew about the debilitating long-term dangers of 

concussions, concussion-related injuries, and sub-concussive injuries (referred to as “traumatic 

brain injuries” or “TBIs”) that resulted from playing college football, but recklessly disregarded 

this information to protect the very profitable business of “amateur” college football.

6. While in school, Alcorn football players were under Defendant’s care. 

Unfortunately, Defendant did not care about the off-field consequences that would haunt 

students, like Plaintiff Baker, for the rest of their lives.

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 2 of 31 PageID #:2
3

7. Despite knowing for decades of a vast body of scientific research describing the 

danger of traumatic brain injuries (“TBIs”) like those Plaintiff experienced, Defendant failed to 

implement adequate procedures to protect Plaintiff and other Alcorn football players from the 

long-term dangers associated with them. It did so knowingly and for profit.

8. As a direct result of Defendant’s acts and omissions, Plaintiff and countless 

former Alcorn football players suffered brain and other neurocognitive injuries from playing 

NCAA football. As such, Plaintiff brings this Class Action Complaint in order to vindicate those 

players’ rights and hold the NCAA accountable.

PARTIES

9. Plaintiff Thomas Baker is a natural person and citizen of the State of California. 

10. Defendant NCAA is an unincorporated association with its principal place of 

business located at 700 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46206. Defendant NCAA 

is not organized under the laws of any State, but is registered as a tax-exempt organization with 

the Internal Revenue Service. As such, Defendant NCAA is a citizen of the State of Indiana 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(10). 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

11. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1332(d)(2) because (a) at least one member of the Class, which consists of at least 100 

members, is a citizen of a different state than Defendant, (b) the amount in controversy exceeds 

$5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and (c) none of the exceptions under that subsection 

apply to this action.

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 3 of 31 PageID #:3
4

12. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant NCAA because it conducts 

significant business in this District, including establishing consumer and business contracts here, 

and because it maintains its principal place of business in this District. 

13. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because a substantial 

part of the events and omissions giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred in and/or emanated 

from this District, and because Defendant NCAA resides here. 

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

I. Defendant Had A Duty To Protect Alcorn Student-Athletes, Including Plaintiff.

14. The NCAA is the governing body of collegiate athletics that oversees twentythree college sports and over 400,000 students who participate in intercollegiate athletics, 

including the football program at Alcorn. According to the NCAA, more than 1,200 schools, 

conferences and affiliate organizations collectively invest in improving the experiences of 

athletes—on the field, in the classroom, and in life.

15. The NCAA brings in more than $750 million in revenue each year and is the most 

significant college sports-governing body in the United States.

16. The NCAA plays a significant role in governing and regulating the Alcorn

football program and owes a duty to safeguard the well-being of its student-athletes. 

17. In fact, since its founding in 1906, the NCAA (then the Intercollegiate Athletic 

Association of the United States (“IAAUS”)), has claimed to be “dedicated to safeguarding the 

well-being of student-athletes and equipping them with the skills to succeed on the playing field, 

in the classroom and throughout life.”1 The IAAUS was specifically formed for this purpose 

1 Who We Are, Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n, http://www.ncaa.org/about/who-we-are 

(last visited March 16, 2020).

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 4 of 31 PageID #:4
5

because, at the turn of the twentieth century, head injuries were occurring at an alarming rate in 

college football. In response, President Theodore Roosevelt convened a group of Ivy League 

university presidents and coaches to discuss how the game could be made safer. After several 

subsequent meetings of colleges, the NCAA was established.2

18. As such, the genesis of the NCAA was for a singular goal: “to keep college 

athletes safe.”3

19. The overarching principles of the NCAA, including its purported commitment to 

safeguarding its athletes, are contained in the NCAA Constitution. The NCAA Constitution 

clearly defines the NCAA’s purpose and fundamental policies to include maintaining control 

over and responsibility for intercollegiate sports and athletes. The NCAA Constitution states: 

The purposes of this Association are:

(a) To initiate, stimulate and improve intercollegiate athletics 

programs for athletes;

(b) To uphold the principal of institutional control of, and 

responsibility for, all intercollegiate sports in conformity with 

the constitution and bylaws of this association; 

NCAA Const., Art. 1, § 1.2(a)(b).

20. The NCAA Constitution also defines one of its “Fundamental Policies” as the 

requirement that “[m]ember institutions shall be obligated to apply and enforce this legislation, 

and the enforcement procedures of the Association shall be applied to an institution when it fails 

to fulfill this obligation.” NCAA Const., Art. 1, § 1.3.2. 

2

In 1910, the IAAUS changed its name to the National Collegiate Athletic Association. 

3 Well-Being, Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n, http://www.ncaa.org/health-and-safety (last 

visited March 16, 2020).

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 5 of 31 PageID #:5
6

21. Article 2.2 of the NCAA Constitution specifically governs the “Principle of 

Student-Athlete Well-Being,” and provides: 

2.2 The Principle of Student-Athlete Well-Being.

Intercollegiate athletics programs shall be conducted in a manner 

designed to protect and enhance the physical and educational wellbeing of student athletes. (Revised: 11/21/05.) 

2.2.3 Health and Safety. 

It is the responsibility of each member institution to protect the 

health of, and provide a safe environment for, each of its 

participating student athletes. (Adopted: 1/10/95.)

22. To accomplish this purpose, the NCAA promulgates and implements standard 

sport regulations and requirements, such as the NCAA Constitution, Operating Bylaws, and 

Administrative Bylaws. These NCAA documents provide detailed instructions on game and 

practice rules, player eligibility, scholarships, and player well-being and safety. Both NCAA 

member institutions, including schools like Alcorn, and NCAA conferences are obligated to 

abide by the NCAA’s rules and requirements. Specifically, according to the NCAA Constitution: 

“Each institution shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the Association in the 

conduct of its intercollegiate athletics programs . . . Members of an institution’s staff, athletes, 

and other individuals and groups representing the institution’s athletics interests shall comply 

with the applicable Association rules, and the member institution shall be responsible for such 

compliance.” NCAA Const., Art. 2, § 2.8.1.

23. The NCAA publishes a health and safety guide termed the Sports Medicine 

Handbook (the “Handbook”). The Handbook, which is produced annually, includes the NCAA’s 

official policies and guidelines for the treatment and prevention of sports-related injuries, as well 

as return-to-play guidelines, and recognizes that “student-athletes rightfully assume that those 

who sponsor intercollegiate athletics have taken reasonable precautions to minimize the risk of 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 6 of 31 PageID #:6
7

injury from athletics participation.”4

24. The NCAA, therefore, holds itself out as both a proponent of, and authority on,

the treatment and prevention of sports-related injuries upon which NCAA athletes (including 

Plaintiff Baker), Alcorn, and all other member institutions can rely for guidance on player-safety 

issues.

25. Plaintiff Baker—and football players at Alcorn—relied upon the NCAA’s 

authority and guidance to protect his health and safety by treating and preventing head-related 

injuries, including the effects of those head injuries later on in his life.

26. As compared to Plaintiff and other Alcorn football players, the NCAA was in a 

superior position to know of and mitigate the risks of sustaining concussions and other TBIs 

while playing football at Alcorn. It failed to do so.

II. Decades Of Studies Firmly Establish The Dangers Of Football-Related Concussions.

27. Throughout the twentieth century and into the twenty-first century, studies have 

firmly established that repetitive and violent impacts to the head can cause concussions and 

TBIs, with a heightened risk of long-term injuries and impacts, including—but not limited to—

memory loss, dementia, depression, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, and CTE.

28. Such violent impacts to the head are a one-way street for those who experience 

them. As Jonathan J. Russin—Assistant Surgical Director at the USC Neurorestoration Center at 

the Keck School of Medicine—has stated, “there’s no way to undo a traumatic brain injury,” and 

one’s “best bet is to avoid concussions altogether.”5

4

John T. Parsons, 2014-15 NCAA Sports Med. Handbook, Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n 

(Aug. 2014), available at https://bit.ly/2QD5DUx.

5 Deanna Pai, Do Concussions Increase the Risk of Stroke or Brain Cancer?, Keck Med. of 

USC, https://bit.ly/2MzSkkC (last visited March 16, 2020).

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 7 of 31 PageID #:7
8

29. To better understand the results of these studies, a brief introduction to 

concussions in football follows.

A. An Overview of Concussions in Football.

30. A TBI is an injury to the brain that comes as the result of the application of either 

external physical force or rapid acceleration and deceleration forces, which disrupts brain 

function in a manner that causes impairments in cognitive and/or physical function. 

31. A concussion is a TBI initiated by an impact to the head, which causes the head 

and brain to move rapidly back and forth. The movement causes the brain to bounce around or 

twist within the skull, damaging brain cells and leading to harmful chemical changes in the brain. 

32. The human brain is made of soft tissue, cushioned by spinal fluid, and encased in 

a hard skull. During everyday activity, the spinal fluid protects the brain from crashing against 

the skull. But relatively minor impacts—including not only direct blows to the head, but also 

blows to the body and movements that cause the neck to whiplash—can move the brain enough 

to press through the spinal fluid, knock against the inside of the skull, and cause concussions.

33. Concussions typically occur when linear and rotational accelerations impact the 

brain through either direct impact to the head or indirect impacts that whiplash the head. During 

the course of a college football season, studies have shown that athletes can receive more than 

1,000 impacts greater than 10 Gs. This is slightly more force than a fighter pilot receives from 

performing maximal maneuvers. The majority of football-related hits to the head exceed 20 Gs, 

with some going well over 100 Gs.

i. Concussion Symptoms.

34. When a collegiate athlete suffers a severe impact to the head, he may experience 

concussion-related symptoms, including:

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 8 of 31 PageID #:8
9

• “seeing stars” and feeling dazed, dizzy, or lightheaded;

• memory loss;

• nausea or vomiting;

• headaches;

• blurred vision and sensitivity to light;

• slurred speech or saying things that do not make sense;

• difficulty concentrating, thinking, or making decisions;

• difficulty with coordination or balance;

• feeling anxious or irritable for no apparent reason; and

• feeling overly tired.

35. A collegiate athlete may not recognize the signs and/or symptoms of a 

concussion, and, more often, the effect of the concussion itself prevents him from recognizing 

them. Because of that, he may put himself at risk of further injury by returning to a game after a 

concussion. Brains that have not had time to properly heal from a concussion are particularly 

susceptible to further injury.

ii. Post-Concussion Treatment.

36. After a concussion, the brain needs time to heal. Doctors generally prohibit 

individuals from returning to normal activities—certainly including contact sports—until all 

symptoms have subsided. They do so because, immediately after a concussion, the brain is 

particularly vulnerable to further injury. Even after the immediate effects have worn off, a person 

who has suffered a concussion is four to six times more likely to receive another concussion than 

a person who has been concussion-free.

37. The length of the healing process varies from person to person and from 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 9 of 31 PageID #:9
10

concussion to concussion. Symptoms may even last for one or two weeks.

38. Individuals who do not recover from a concussion within a few weeks are 

diagnosed with post-concussion syndrome. The symptoms of post-concussion syndrome can last 

for months, and sometimes can even be permanent. Generally, people suffering from postconcussion syndrome are referred to specialists for additional medical help. 

39. Still, many people think of concussions as short-term, temporary injuries. 

However, decades of scientific research demonstrate the effects of concussions are anything but 

temporary. 

B. Studies Confirm the Dangers and Long-Term Effects of Concussions.

40. Two of the leading studies on the long-term effects of concussions were 

conducted by Boston University’s Center for the Study of Traumatic Encephalopathy and the 

Brain Injury Research Institute. These studies showed the “devastating consequences” of 

repeated concussions, including that they lead to an increased risk of depression, dementia, and 

suicide. These studies have also demonstrated that repeated concussions trigger progressive 

degeneration of the brain tissue, including the build-up of an abnormal protein called the tau 

protein.

41. In his early studies, Dr. Robert Cantu of the Boston University Center for the 

Study of Traumatic Encephalopathy found evidence of CTE in 90 of 94 (96%) autopsied brains 

of former NFL players. A recent update to these studies found CTE in a staggering 110 of 111 

(99%) former NFL players and 48 of 53 former college players (91%).6

42. These more recent studies were neither aberrations nor surprises but

6

Jesse Mez, MD, MS, et al., Clinicopathological Evaluation of Chronic Traumatic 

Encephalopathy in Players of American Football, 318 JAMA 4, 360–370 (2017).

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 10 of 31 PageID #:10
11

confirmations of what was already known or readily apparent from the existing medical 

literature. 

43. Studies like these, which establish the devastating dangers related to TBIs, date 

back to the early twentieth century. For example, in an article in the 1905 multi-volume medical 

text A System of Medicine, surgeon Sir William Bennett noted that the dangers from TBIs can 

arise just as easily when “no loss of consciousness occurs at all,” and that such injuries “may in 

the end have far graver results” due to their “escap[ing] treatment altogether in the first instance” 

given their less severe appearance.7 Bennett noted that the imposition of a strict treatment 

regimen immediately after an injury, during initial recovery, and following the initial recovery 

period, was essential to the “treatment of all cases of concussion of the brain, whether they be 

severe or slight.”8

44. Some early articles from this period began to recognize the unique dangers 

presented by football, specifically. The editors of the Journal of the American Medical 

Association recognized the long-term risks of such head injuries very early on, writing in 1905 

that “[t]o be a cripple or lunatic for life is paying high for athletic emulation” via football.9

Similarly, the risks of concussions in football were discussed in a 1906 article by Dr. Edward 

Nichols, who observed that a concussed player might go through multiple plays before his 

teammates noticed his altered mental state.10

45. Beginning with studies on the brain injuries suffered by boxers in the 1920s, 

7 Sir William Bennett, Some Milder Forms of Concussion of the Brain, A Sys. of Med. 

Vol. 8 231-32 (2d ed. 1910).

8

Id.

9 Editors, The Football Mortality, 39 JAMA 1464 (1905).

10 Edward Nichols, The Physical Aspect of American Football, 154 Boston Med. & Surgical 

J.1 (1906).

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 11 of 31 PageID #:11
12

medical science began to clearly recognize the debilitating effects of concussions and other TBIs, 

connect it to contact sports (including football), and find that repetitive head impacts can cause 

permanent brain damage and increased risk of long-term cognitive decline and disability.

46. For instance, in 1927, Drs. Michael Osnato and Vincent Giliberti discussed a 

disease they called traumatic encephalitis in an article on post-concussion damage in Archives of 

Neurology & Psychiatry, concluding that brain disease could manifest in “young men knocked 

out in football and other games,” but noting that the issue had “not received adequate 

attention.”11 Then, in 1928, Pathologist Dr. Harrison Martland published a study called “Punch

Drunk” in the Journal of the American Medical Association, where he described the clinical 

spectrum of abnormalities found in nearly 50 percent of boxers who had been knocked out or 

who had suffered a considerable impact to the head.12

47. Countless studies were later conducted on boxers suffering chronic neurological 

symptoms as a result of repeated head injuries, and who displayed signs of dementia and 

impairment of motor functions.13 As incidents of chronic encephalopathy increased, they were 

often characterized as a “Parkinsonian” pattern of progressive decline. However, in a chapter of a 

mid-twentieth century book on brain injuries, psychiatrists Karl M. Bowman and Abram Blau 

coined the term “chronic traumatic encephalopathy” to explain the deterioration of a boxer’s 

11 Michael Osnato & Vincent Giliberti, Postconcussion Neurosis-Traumatic Encephalitis, 

18 Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry 181 (1927). 

12 Dr. Harrison S. Martland, Punch Drunk, 91 JAMA 1103 (1928).

13 See, e.g., E. Guttmann & C.E. Winterstein, Disturbances of Consciousness After Head 

Injuries: Observations on Boxers, 84 J. of Mental Sci. 347 (Mar. 1938); Harry L. Parker, 

Traumatic Encephalopathy (‘Punch Drunk’) of Professional Pugilists, 15 J. of Neurology & 

Psychopathology 20 (July 1934); C.E. Winterstein, Head Injuries Attributable to Boxing, 2 

Lancet 719 (Sept. 1937). 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 12 of 31 PageID #:12
13

mental state over time.14

48. In 1936, Dr. Edward J. Carroll, Jr. wrote an article further recognizing “punchdrunk syndrome’s” seriousness, stating that “no head blow is taken with impunity, and [] each 

knock-out causes definite and irreparable damage. If such trauma is repeated for a long enough 

period, it is inevitable that nerve cell insufficiency will develop ultimately, and the individual 

will become punch-drunk.” He also noted that in addition to boxers, punch drunk had been 

recognized among football players.15

49. The next year, the American Football Coaches Association published a report 

warning that players who suffer even “one concussion” should be removed from play.16

50. In 1952, an article published in The New England Journal of Medicine first

recommended a “three-strike rule” for concussions in football, demanding that players cease to 

play football permanently after receiving their third concussion.17

51. Starting in the late 1960s, the medical community began focusing on the effects of 

concussion-related injuries in football. In a 1967 study, Drs. John R. Hughes and D. Eugene 

Hendrix examined how severe impacts affected brain activity in football players by utilizing 

electroencephalograms (“EEGs”).18 Several years after that, a potentially fatal condition known 

14 K.M. Bowman & A. Blau, Psychotic States Following Head and Brain Injury in Adults 

and Children, Injuries of the Skull, Brain and Spinal Cord: Neuropsychiatric, Surgical, and 

Medico-Legal Aspects 309 (S. Brock, ed. 1940). 

15 Edward J. Carroll, Jr., Punch-Drunk, 191 Am. J. Med. Sci. 706 (1936).

16 Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the American Football Coaches 

Association (Dec. 29, 1937) (“Sports demanding personal contact should be eliminated after an 

individual has suffered a concussion”).

17 Augustus Thorndike, Serious Recurrent Injuries of Athletes—Contraindications to 

Further Competitive Participation, 247 New Eng. J. Med. 554, 555-56 (1952). 

18 John R. Hughes & D. Eugene Hendrix, Telemetered EEG From A Football Player In 

Action, 24 Electroencephalography & Clin. Neurophysiology 183 (1968).

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 13 of 31 PageID #:13
14

as “Second Impact Syndrome” was identified, which is a re-injury to an already-concussed brain 

that triggers swelling the skull cannot accommodate.

52. In 1975, the Chief Medical Officer of the British Boxing Board of Control 

suggested boxers were not the only persons or athletes vulnerable to the risk of long-term brain 

injuries, stating:

Irreversible brain damage caused by regular excessive punching 

can cause a boxer to become punch drunk, a condition known 

euphemistically in medical terms as [Chronic] Traumatic 

Encephalopathy. The condition can be caused by other hazards of 

contact sports—taking too many falls while hunting or steep 

chasing or the continual use of brute force rather than skill in the 

rugby field or heading a football incessantly over many years. 

Anything which entails intermittent trauma to the head can 

cause it.19

53. Overall, countless studies—published in prominent medical journals such as the 

Journal of the American Medical Association, Neurology, The New England Journal of 

Medicine, and Lancet—warned of the dangers of single concussions, multiple concussions, 

and/or football-related head trauma from multiple concussions and head injuries. These studies 

collectively established that: 

• repetitive head trauma in contact sports, including football, 

has potential dangerous long-term effects on brain function; 

• traumatic encephalopathy (dementia pugilistica) is caused by 

repeated sub-concussive and concussive blows to the head; 

• acceleration and rapid deceleration of the head that results in 

brief loss of consciousness also results in a tearing of the 

axons (brain cells) in the brainstem; 

• with respect to head injuries in athletes who play contact 

sports, there is a relationship between neurologic pathology 

and length of the athlete’s career;

• immediate retrograde memory issues occur following 

concussions; 

• head injuries require recovery time without risk of subjection 

19 J.W. Graham, Eight, Nine, Out! Fifty Years as Boxer’s Doctor, 56 (1975). 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 14 of 31 PageID #:14
15

to further injury; 

• a football player who suffers a concussion requires 

significant rest before being subjected to further contact; and 

• minor head trauma can lead to neuropathological and 

neurophysiological alterations, including neuronal damage, 

reduced cerebral blood flow, altered brainstem evoked 

potentials and reduced speed of information processing. 

54. As a result of these studies, medical professionals began recommending changes 

to the game of football and how concussion-related injuries should be handled. 

55. By 1991, Dr. Robert Cantu, the American Academy of Neurology, and the

Colorado Medical Society had developed return-to-play criteria for football players suspected of 

sustained head injuries. 

56. In 2003, a NCAA concussion study concluded that football players who had 

previously sustained a concussion were more likely to have future concussion injuries. Another 

2003 NCAA concussion study concluded that collegiate football players “may require several 

days for recovery of symptoms, cognitive dysfunction, and postural instability after [a] 

concussion,” and that concussions are “followed by a complex cascade of ionic, metabolic, and 

physiological events that can adversely affect cerebral function for several days to weeks.”20

57. Following these studies, in 2004, the National Athletic Trainers’ Association 

published a position statement, recommending baseline cognitive and postural-stability testing, 

as well as return-to-play recommendations, including holding out athletes who exhibit symptoms 

of a suspected head injury.

58. Building upon that, a convention of neurological experts met in Prague in 2004 

with the aim of providing recommendations for the improvement of safety and health of athletes 

20 Michael McCrea, et al., Acute Effects and Recovery Time Following Concussion in 

Collegiate Football Players, The NCAA Concussion Study, The Journal of the Am. Med. Ass’n

(November 19, 2003), available at http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=197668.

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 15 of 31 PageID #:15
16

who suffer concussive injuries in ice hockey, rugby, football, and other sports, based on the most 

up-to-date research. These experts recommended that a player never be returned to play while 

symptomatic, and coined the phrase, “when in doubt, sit them out.”

59. Ultimately, while the NCAA knew of the harmful effects of TBIs (and other head 

injuries) on athletes for decades, it ignored these facts and failed to institute any meaningful 

methods of warning and/or protecting the athletes, including football players like Plaintiff Baker

and other Alcorn student-athletes. For the NCAA, the continued expansion and operation of 

college football was simply too profitable to put at risk.

III. The NCAA Breached Its Duties To Its Student-Athletes, Including Plaintiff Baker, 

By Ignoring The Dangers Of Concussions And Failing To Implement Adequate 

Concussion Management Protocols. 

60. For decades, the NCAA has been aware—through its own institutional 

knowledge, internal research, and current medical science, among other sources of information—

that severe and/or repeated head impacts can lead to long-term brain injuries, including memory

loss, dementia, depression, and CTE. Unfortunately, while the NCAA knew about the harmful 

and devastating effects of these sub-concussive and concussive injuries, it recklessly ignored 

these facts and failed to implement reasonable concussion management protocols to protect its 

athletes, including Plaintiff. 

61. Such conduct stands in stark contrast to the NCAA’s approach in comparable 

contexts. For instance, in 1960, the NCAA wholly discontinued its relationship with collegiate 

boxing following widespread criticism of the sport’s dangers and a heightened organizational 

awareness of the long-term risks student boxers faced—including, but not limited to, developing 

“punch drunk syndrome.” But as to college football, including Alcorn’s football program, the 

NCAA continued to govern, support, and profit from the sport without disclosing what it knew to 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 16 of 31 PageID #:16
17

student-athletes, including Plaintiff Baker.

62. Since at least 1933, the NCAA has known of the serious nature of concussions 

and other head injuries in college football, and even recognized the need for appropriate 

concussion management protocols. In its 1933 Sports Medicine Handbook—which it distributed 

to all member institutions—the NCAA specifically recognized that head injuries warrant special 

attention and should not be regarded lightly.

63. The 1933 Sports Medicine Handbook then provided information for school and 

college doctors, coaches, and trainers to identify the signs and symptoms of concussions, as well 

as methods to be used on the sidelines for treating them. It discussed head injuries, stating that 

they “are in a category by themselves and warrant special attention,” as they “may be, and often 

are more severe in their immediate and remote consequences” than other injuries. Notably, the 

1933 Sports Medicine Handbook recommended that, when concussion-related symptoms lasted 

longer than two days, players should “not be permitted to compete for 21 days or longer, if at 

all.” It also stated, “[t]here is definitely a condition described as ‘punch drunk’ and often 

recurrent concussion cases in football and boxing demonstrate this,” and that “[a]ny individual 

who is knocked unconscious repeatedly on slight provocation should be forbidden to play bodycontact sport.”

64. The NCAA recognizes that its Sports Medicine Handbook “may constitute some 

evidence of the legal standard of care,” and has publicly recognized its duty and moral obligation 

to protect collegiate athletes. As NCAA President Mark Emmert testified to the Senate 

Commerce Committee in January 2014, “I will unequivocally state we have a clear moral 

obligation to make sure we do everything we can to protect and support student-athletes.”

65. Indeed, in the September 1968 issue of NCAA News, the NCAA published an 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 17 of 31 PageID #:17
18

article entitled Dangers of Grid Head Injuries Cited by Safeguards Committee. In the article, the 

NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sport issued a statement 

on the dangers of repeated head injuries in football, stating:

[T]hose individuals who have been rendered unconscious, even 

momentarily, in a given game should never be allowed to play 

again in the same game and not allowed to return to contact until 

all symptoms have cleared up entirely and he has been checked by 

a competent medical authority. 

66. Rather than inform Plaintiff and other Alcorn athletes of these risks or implement 

protocols to protect and safeguard them from TBI-related injuries (as the NCAA promised to do 

through the NCAA Constitution, among other things), the NCAA failed to meaningfully adopt or 

enforce the internationally accepted guidelines regarding concussion management and return to 

play protocols until 2010. 

67. Instead, in complete disregard of the vast body of known scientific evidence and 

the resources and authority that it possessed, the NCAA failed prior to 2010 to, amongst other 

things, do any of the following:

• implement adequate guidelines or rules to prevent repeated 

concussions, and failed to educate players, including

Plaintiff, about the increased risk of concussive and subconcussive injury in football, particularly under 

circumstances when the helmet is used as a weapon when 

tackling, blocking, or running with the football;

• recommend or enforce adequate return to play procedures or 

take action to educate athletes, including Plaintiff, about the 

risks of repetitive head injuries;

• conduct a football program that proactively encouraged 

Plaintiff and other Alcorn football players to avoid head 

injuries, instead compelling players to ignore concussion 

symptoms and continue to play football within moments of 

experiencing concussion symptoms; and

• contact football players, including Plaintiff, after they left 

Alcorn to inform them that they had been exposed to an 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 18 of 31 PageID #:18
19

increased risk of long-term brain damage by the subconcussive and concussive blows sustained while playing 

football for Alcorn. 

68. In April 2010, under mounting public pressure, the NCAA made changes to its 

concussion treatment protocols, this time enacting a new policy that required its member 

institutions to have a Concussion Management Plan (“CMP”) in place for all sports. 

69. Under that new policy, which became effective in August 2010, member schools 

were required to have a CMP on file “such that a student-athlete who exhibits signs, symptoms, 

or behaviors consistent with a concussion shall be removed from practice or competition and

evaluated by an athletics healthcare provider with experience in the evaluation and management 

of concussions.” 

70. The policy further states that students diagnosed with a concussion “shall not 

return to activity for the remainder of that day” and that the team physician would determine 

medical clearance.

71. Finally, the policy required students to sign a statement “in which they accept the 

responsibility for reporting their injuries and illnesses, including signs and symptoms of 

concussion” to medical staff and noted that students would be provided educational materials on 

concussions during the signing process. 

72. This policy is flawed though: due to the very nature of concussions, athletes 

suffering concussive injuries are in no position to police themselves or to give informed consent 

about whether to continue playing. For example, the types of questions used to screen players for 

concussions include: “What’s your name?”, “What year is it?”, and “What sport are we 

playing?”. These types of questions are used for screening precisely because players 

experiencing concussions routinely fail to answer them correctly, despite their very elementary 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 19 of 31 PageID #:19
20

nature. Following logically on that, a player who cannot state his or her own name is in no 

condition to make an informed decision about whether or not to continue playing, and is entirely 

dependent on others, such as the NCAA and Alcorn, to identify concussive injuries in real-time 

and take appropriate remedial actions. The NCAA has stood in the role of guardian, tasked with 

making decisions in his and other football players’ best interests. The NCAA failed to fulfill that 

role and instead acted in its own self-interest, to the detriment of its student-athletes, including 

Plaintiff. 

73. In the end, the NCAA implemented these (still deficient) policies far too late for 

Plaintiff Baker and other Alcorn football players.

FACTS SPECIFIC TO THOMAS BAKER

74. Plaintiff Thomas Baker played football at Alcorn from 1998 to 2000, as a wide 

receiver.

75. While playing at Alcorn, Plaintiff Baker suffered from numerous concussions, as 

well as countless sub-concussive hits as part of routine practice and gameplay. 

76. Since the inception of Alcorn’s football program, through at least 2010, there 

were no adequate concussion management protocols or policies in place to address and treat 

concussions sustained by student-athletes during practice and in games. For instance, when 

Plaintiff Baker and other Alcorn players experienced a significant head injury or concussion, 

they would quickly be returned to the field of play or only be taken out of play or practice for an 

inadequate period of time. 

77. In fact, although Plaintiff Baker sustained repetitive serious blows to the head in 

practices and games for the NCAA’s profit, the NCAA failed to adopt or implement adequate 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 20 of 31 PageID #:20
21

concussion management safety protocols or return to play guidelines during his time on Alcorn’s 

football team.

78. As a result, Plaintiff Baker now suffers from issues including, but not limited to, 

depression, headaches, memory loss, loss of concentration, and emotional instability.

CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

79. Class Definition: Plaintiff Thomas Baker brings this action for himself and on 

behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, defined as follows:

All individuals who participated in Alcorn’s football program between 

1965 and 2010.

The following people are excluded from the Class: (1) any Judge or Magistrate presiding over 

this action and members of their families; (2) Defendant, Defendant’s subsidiaries, parents, 

successors, predecessors, and any entity in which the Defendant or its parents have a 

controlling interest and its current or former employees, officers, and directors; (3) persons 

who properly execute and file a timely request for exclusion from the Class; (4) persons whose 

claims in this matter have been finally adjudicated on the merits or otherwise released; (5) 

Plaintiff’s counsel and Defendant’s counsel; and (6) the legal representatives, successors, and 

assigns of any such excluded persons. 

80. Numerosity: The exact number of members of the Class is not available to 

Plaintiff at this time, but it is clear that individual joinder is impracticable. Upon information and 

belief, hundreds of individuals fall into the definition of the Class.

81. Commonality: There are many questions of law and fact common to Plaintiff and 

the Class, and those questions predominate over any questions that may affect individual 

members. Common questions for the Class include, but are not limited to, the following:

(a) Whether Defendant had a duty to adequately warn and educate players 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 21 of 31 PageID #:21
22

about the dangers and symptoms of concussions and concussionrelated brain injuries; 

(b) Whether Defendant had a duty to enact rules and procedures to protect 

players from sustaining concussions and concussion-related brain 

injuries; 

(c) Whether Defendant’s conduct as alleged herein constitutes a breach of 

duty;

(d) Whether Defendant’s conduct as alleged herein constitutes negligence; 

(e) Whether Defendant’s conduct as alleged herein constitutes breach of 

contract; 

(f) Whether Defendant’s conduct as alleged herein constitutes fraudulent 

concealment; and

(g) Whether Plaintiff and the Class are entitled to equitable relief, 

including actual and compensatory damages, and other injunctive 

relief.

82. Typicality: Plaintiff’s claims are typical of those of members of the Class, as 

Plaintiff and other members sustained injuries arising out of the same wrongful conduct of 

Defendant. 

83. Adequate Representation: Plaintiff will fairly and adequately represent the 

interests of the Class and has retained counsel competent and experienced in complex litigation 

and class actions. Plaintiff has no interests antagonistic to those of the Class, and Defendant has 

no defenses unique to Plaintiff.

84. Predominance and Superiority: Class proceedings are superior to all other 

available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy, as joinder of all 

members of the Class is impracticable. Individual litigation would not be preferable to a class 

action because individual litigation would increase the delay and expense to all parties due to the 

complex legal and factual controversies presented in this Complaint. By contrast, a class action 

presents far fewer management difficulties and provides the benefits of single adjudication, 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 22 of 31 PageID #:22
23

economy of scale, and comprehensive supervision by a single court. Economies of time, effort, 

and expense will be fostered and uniformity of decisions will be ensured.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

NEGLIGENCE

(Individually and on Behalf of the Class as Against Defendant)

85. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations. 

86. From its inception and by virtue of its role as the governing body of college 

athletics, the NCAA has historically assumed a duty to protect the health and safety of all 

athletes at member institutions, including Plaintiff Baker. The NCAA also assumed a duty of 

care by voluntarily taking steps to protect and promote the health and safety of its players, 

including promulgating safety handbooks and regulations. That duty included an obligation to 

supervise, regulate, and monitor the rules of its governed sports, and provide appropriate and upto-date guidance and regulations to minimize the risk of injury to its athletes.

87. The duties of the NCAA included specific obligations to supervise, regulate, and 

monitor the rules of the Alcorn football program and provide appropriate and up-to-date 

guidance and regulations to minimize the risk of long-term and short-term brain damage to 

Alcorn football players, including Plaintiff Baker.

88. The NCAA had a duty to educate Alcorn football players on the proper ways to 

evaluate and treat head injuries during and after football games and practices, including 

repetitive concussive and sub-concussive injuries. The NCAA’s duties further included a duty to 

warn its athletes of the dangers of concussive and sub-concussive injuries and of the risks 

associated with football before, during, and after they played college football, and as additional 

information came to light. 

89. The NCAA had a duty not to conceal material information from Alcorn football 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 23 of 31 PageID #:23
24

players, including Plaintiff Baker.

90. The NCAA breached its duties owed to Alcorn student-athletes, including 

Plaintiff Baker, by failing to implement, promulgate, or require appropriate and up-to-date 

guidelines regarding the evaluation and treatment of TBIs on the playing field, in the locker 

room, and in the weeks and months after they sustained TBIs, as well as providing treatment for 

the latent effects of TBIs. These failings included, but are not limited to:

(a) failing to adequately recognize and monitor concussive and 

sub-concussive injury during football practices and games;

(b) failing to adequately inform student football players of the 

dangers of concussive and sub-concussive injuries;

(c) failing to adequately design and implement return to play 

regulations for student football players who sustained 

concussive and/or sub-concussive injuries and/or were 

suspected of sustaining such injuries;

(d) failing to adequately design and implement procedures to 

monitor the health of student football players after they 

sustained (or were suspected of sustaining) concussive 

and/or sub-concussive injuries; 

(e) failing to adequately inform the families of student football 

players who sustained concussive and/or sub-concussive 

injuries; and 

(f) failing to adequately provide adequate notification, warning 

and treatment for latent neuro-cognitive and neurobehavioral effects of concussive and sub-concussive 

injuries, after the time student football players, including 

Plaintiff Baker, left Alcorn. 

91. The NCAA breached its duties to student football players, including Plaintiff 

Baker, by failing to disclose and/or failing to recognize and/or being willfully non-observant of: 

(a) material information regarding the long-term risks and effects of repetitive head trauma it

possessed or should have possessed; (b) the dangers of concussive and sub-concussive injuries; 

and (c) the proper ways to evaluate, treat, and avoid concussive and sub-concussive trauma to 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 24 of 31 PageID #:24
25

football players, including Plaintiff Baker.

92. As a football player at Alcorn, Plaintiff Baker and those like him relied upon the 

guidance, expertise, and instruction of the NCAA in understanding the risks associated with 

serious and life-altering concussive and sub-concussive hits in football. 

93. At all times, the NCAA had superior knowledge of material information regarding 

the effects of repeated head injuries, including through its institutional knowledge of such 

effects. Because such information was not readily available to Alcorn football players, including 

Plaintiff Baker, the NCAA knew or should have known that they would act and rely upon its 

guidance, expertise, and instruction on these crucial medical issues while attending Alcorn and 

thereafter. 

94. Repetitive TBIs during college football practices and games have a pathological 

and latent effect on the brain. Repetitive exposure to rapid accelerations to the head causes 

deformation, twisting, shearing, and stretching of neuronal cells such that multiple forms of 

damage take place, including the release of small amounts of chemicals within the brain, such as

protein, which is a signature pathology of the same phenomenon as boxer’s encephalopathy (or 

“punch drunk syndrome”) studied and reported by Harrison Martland in 1928.

95. In addition, repetitive concussive and sub-concussive blows to the head can 

significantly increase a person’s risk of developing neurodegenerative disorders and diseases, 

including but not limited to CTE, Alzheimer’s disease, and other similar cognitive-impairing 

conditions, especially when such blows are sustained at an early age. 

96. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s negligence, student-athletes, 

including Plaintiff Baker, experienced repetitive concussive and sub-concussive impacts during 

his college football career, which significantly increased their risk of developing

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 25 of 31 PageID #:25
26

neurodegenerative disorders and diseases, including but not limited to CTE, Alzheimer’s disease, 

and other, similar cognitive-impairing conditions. And indeed, Plaintiff now suffers from, and 

continues to suffer from, issues including but not limited to depression, headaches, memory loss, 

loss of concentration, and emotional instability.

97. The repetitive head accelerations and hits to which student-athletes, including 

Plaintiff Baker, were exposed to presented risks of latent and long-term debilitating chronic 

illnesses. Absent the NCAA’s negligence and concealment, the risk of harm to these studentathletes, including Plaintiff Baker, would have been materially decreased, and they would not 

have developed serious mental health issues. 

98. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s negligence, Plaintiff and the Class 

have incurred damages in the form of permanent brain damage, emotional distress, past and 

future medical costs, health care, home care expenses, other out of pocket expenses, lost time, 

lost future earnings, and other damages. Plaintiff and other members of the Class will likely 

incur future damages caused by Defendant’s negligence. 

99. As such, Defendant is the direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff and the putative 

Class’s injuries, and is liable to them for the full measure of damages allowed under applicable 

law, as well as interest, reasonable attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

BREACH OF EXPRESS CONTRACT

(Individually and on Behalf of the Class as Against Defendant)

100. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations.

101. As a football player at Alcorn, an institution governed by the NCAA, Plaintiff 

Baker and other Alcorn football players were required to, and did, enter into contracts with the 

NCAA as a prerequisite to sports participation. These contracts required Plaintiff Baker and 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 26 of 31 PageID #:26
27

other Alcorn football players to complete a form affirming that they had read the NCAA 

regulations and applicable NCAA Division manual, which expressly encompassed the NCAA 

Constitution, Operating Bylaws, and Administrative Bylaws, and further, that they agreed to 

abide by Division Bylaws. 

102. In exchange for these student-athletes’ agreements, the NCAA promised to 

perform certain services and functions, including, amongst other things:

(a) conducting intercollegiate athletics in a manner designed to 

protect and enhance the physical and educational wellbeing 

of NCAA athletes;

(b) requiring that each member institution protect the health of, 

and provide a safe environment for, each of its participating 

athletes; and

(c) requiring that each member institution establish and 

maintain an environment in which the NCAA athletes’ 

activities are conducted as an integral part of the athletes’ 

educational experience. 

103. By signing and agreeing to abide by NCAA rules and regulations, and thereafter 

participating in NCAA-sanctioned sports programs in accordance with said rules and regulations, 

Plaintiff Baker and other Alcorn football players fulfilled their contractual obligations to the 

NCAA. 

104. As described in the foregoing allegations, the NCAA breached its contractual 

agreement by failing to ensure Plaintiff Baker and other Alcorn student-athletes were provided a 

safe environment in which to participate in collegiate football. The NCAA further breached its 

contractual agreement by concealing and/or failing to properly educate and warn Plaintiff Baker

and other Alcorn football players about the symptoms and long-term risks of concussions and 

concussion-related traumatic injury.

105. Plaintiff Baker and other Alcorn football players entered into written agreements 

with the NCAA in which they committed to play football at Alcorn, to attend Alcorn as students, 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 27 of 31 PageID #:27
28

and to comply with all codes of conduct and obligations as both football players and students at 

Alcorn. 

106. Plaintiff Baker and other Alcorn football players fulfilled their contractual 

obligations to the NCAA. 

107. The NCAA’s contractual breaches caused Plaintiff Baker and other Alcorn

football players to suffer injuries and damages in the form of, inter alia, past, ongoing, and future 

medical expenses, lost time, lost future earnings, and other damages.

108. As a result of its misconduct, the NCAA is liable to Plaintiff and the Class for the 

full measure of damages and other relief allowed under applicable law.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT

(Individually and On Behalf of the Class as Against Defendant)

109. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations.

110. The NCAA has long understood that repetitive head impacts sustained while 

playing football created a risk of harm to student-athletes that was similar or identical to the risk 

boxers faced by participating in boxing practices and matches.

111. The NCAA was aware of and understood the significance of the published 

medical literature described herein, which detailed the serious risk of short- and long-term brain 

injury and disease associated with repetitive head impacts, including those which Plaintiff Baker

and other Alcorn football players were exposed.

112. The NCAA knowingly concealed these risks from Plaintiff Baker and other 

Alcorn football players considering whether or not to participate in an NCAA football program.

113. By concealing these highly material facts, the NCAA intended to induce a false 

belief in Plaintiff Baker and Alcorn football players like him about the short- and long-term risks 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 28 of 31 PageID #:28
29

of repetitive head impacts in football. As an entity that voluntarily took on the role of governing 

the sport of football in colleges across the country (including Alcorn), and was created and 

perpetuated specifically to protect player safety, the NCAA had a duty to speak about these 

issues—instead, it remained silent. The NCAA’s intent in doing so was to induce Plaintiff Baker

and other Alcorn football players to continue playing NCAA football, even after sustaining one 

or more concussions and even when those concussions required additional time to heal.

114. Plaintiff Baker and other Alcorn football players could not have reasonably been 

expected to know or discover the truth about the risks associated with concussive and subconcussive blows to the head, or were misled from obtaining such truthful information. Plaintiff 

Baker and other Alcorn football players were under the care and treatment of the NCAA, and 

justifiably relied on the NCAA’s silence as representing facts that did not exist.

115. Given the NCAA’s superior and unique vantage point, Plaintiff Baker and other 

Alcorn football players reasonably looked to the NCAA for guidance on head impacts—and 

concussions, in particular—as well as the later-in-life consequences of receiving repetitive head 

impacts during football games and practices at Alcorn.

116. The NCAA failed to act reasonably in light of its omission, including by failing to 

develop and implement adequate guidelines and rules regarding return-to-play criteria, and other 

safety procedures. The NCAA’s inaction and concealment increased the risk of long-term injury 

and illness in Alcorn football players, including Plaintiff Baker—and indeed, did result in them 

suffering from long-term brain injuries and disease.

117. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s knowing concealment and/or 

willful blindness, Plaintiff Baker and other Alcorn football players suffered substantial injuries. 

118. As a direct result of the NCAA’s failure to reveal pertinent information, Plaintiff 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 29 of 31 PageID #:29
30

Baker and Alcorn football players like him incurred economic and non-economic damages in the 

form of pain and suffering, permanent brain damage, past and future medical costs, health care, 

home care expenses, other out of pocket expenses, lost time, lost future earnings, and the loss of 

enjoyment of life.

119. As a result, Defendant is liable to Plaintiff and the Class for the full measure of 

damages allowed under applicable law.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Thomas Baker, individually and on behalf of the Class, 

respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order providing for the following relief: 

A. Certify this case as a class action on behalf of the Class defined above, appoint 

Plaintiff as representative of the Class, and appoint his counsel as Class Counsel;

B. Declare that Defendant’s actions, as set out above, constitute negligence, breach 

of contract, and fraudulent concealment;

C. Award all economic, monetary, actual, consequential, compensatory, and punitive 

damages available at law and caused by Defendant’s conduct, including without limitation 

damages for past, present, and future medical expenses, other out of pocket expenses, lost time 

and interest, lost future earnings, and all other damages suffered, including any future damages 

likely to be incurred by Plaintiff and the Class; 

D. Award Plaintiff and the Class reasonable litigation expenses and attorneys’ fees; 

E. Award Plaintiff and the Class pre- and post-judgment interest, to the extent 

allowable;

F. Enter injunctive and/or declaratory relief as is necessary to protect the interests of 

Plaintiff and the Class; and 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 30 of 31 PageID #:30
31

G. Award such other and further relief as equity and justice may require. 

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury for all issues so triable. 

Respectfully submitted,

THOMAS BAKER, individually and on behalf of 

all others similarly situated,

Dated: March 16, 2020 By: /s/ Jeff Raizner

One of Plaintiff’s Attorneys

Jeff Raizner

efile@raiznerlaw.com

RAIZNER SLANIA LLP

2402 Dunlavy Street

Houston, Texas 77006

Tel: 713.554.9099

Fax: 713.554.9098

Jay Edelson*

jedelson@edelson.com

Benjamin H. Richman*

brichman@edelson.com

EDELSON PC

350 North LaSalle Street, 14th Floor

Chicago, Illinois 60654

Tel: 312.589.6370

Fax: 312.589.6378

Rafey S. Balabanian*

rbalabanian@edelson.com

EDELSON PC

123 Townsend Street, Suite 100

San Francisco, California 94107

Tel: 415.212.9300

Fax: 415.373.9435

Counsel for Plaintiff and the Putative Class

*Admission to be sought. 

Case: 1:20-cv-02319 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/16/20 Page 31 of 31 PageID #:31