Former coach Felling's case continues against IU

Yet another advancement has occurred in one of the ongoing legal battles surrounding former IU basketball coach Bobby Knight and IU employee termination procedures.\nMonroe Circuit Court Judge David Welch rejected IU's motion on Monday to dismiss the lawsuit filed by former assistant basketball coach Ron Felling.\nThe University was claiming that Felling had not met the standard requirements for giving notice of his intent to sue a public agency.\nFelling's suit was brought to the Monroe County Circuit Court in November 2001 after his original suit filed in federal court was dismissed in August because of the 11th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The amendment states that the federal judicial system may not be used for "any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States." In this case, a "State" is interpreted to extend to any of its public universities. \nSince, Felling has been involved in litigation against the University for $1 million dollars in damages, claiming an invasion of privacy, wrongful termination and negligent supervision of Knight's actions. \nFelling claims that Knight secretly listened in on a phone conversation between Felling and former Knight assistant Dan Dakich in December 1999. In the conversation, Felling criticized Knight's reaction to a marginal victory over Notre Dame. After which, the suit claims, Knight fired Felling on the spot during a heated argument.\nKnight allegedly forced Felling to accompany him to his office, where he then berated Felling in front of other assistants and pushed him in the chest, knocking him backward into a television.\nKnight's lawyer has since admitted that Knight shoved Felling during the confrontation, but denied that the action was to be perceived as assault.\nFelling then filed notice of intent to sue the University in May 2000.\nHowever, the University requested that the lawsuit be thrown out on the grounds that the claims that Felling had made in his notice of intent had differed from the claims made in his actual suit.\nYet Welch disagreed, ruling that Felling had complied with Indiana State law, had notified the University on the particulars of his case, and that the University was given sufficient time to investigate the claims and prepare for court.\n"IU is seeking protection in the formalities of the notice requirements," that would circumvent the purpose of the notice statute, Welch said.\nWilliam C. Potter II, Felling's lawyer, wasn't surprised by the decision. He explained that under the law, one must provide a letter notifying the party one wishes to sue of one's intent, but with enough time for the party being sued to investigate the claim.\nPotter was assured that his client's letter was more than sufficient.\n"(The University) interviewed my client for two to three hours once we sent them the letter," Potter said. "They had plenty of time to find out whatever they needed to know." \n"This bodes well for us," Potter said, now that the case will officially go to trial.\nJames Tinney, IU's Vice President of Public Affairs, reacted to these events by expressing his disappointment in the ruling.\n"Obviously, we would have preferred for the case to be dismissed," Tinney said. "However, we are prepared to go forward. This is only one step in a long legal process." \nIU is currently in the midst of another court battle with The Indianapolis Star that is concerned with personal and investigative records involved in Knight's termination.\nThe Felling and Knight firings mark two controversial terminations within a span of two years for Indiana University.\nFelling, who now lives in Arkansas, joined Knight's staff in 1985 after coaching Lawrenceville High School to four Illinois Class A state championships. In 1997, he moved from assistant coach to become Knight's administrative assistant.