Texas court sets June 1 hearing on Brendan Sorsby’s NCAA injunction bid

A Texas court will hold a June 1 hearing at 10:00 a.m. ET on Texas Tech quarterback Brendan Sorsby’s request for a preliminary injunction against the NCAA. The court set the session earlier than the June 15 date proposed in case filings, which cited a June 22 deadline to apply for the NFL supplemental draft. Retired Tarrant County senior judge Kenneth C. Curry is assigned to preside over the proceeding.

The accelerated timetable places Sorsby’s legal effort against the backdrop of the NFL’s supplemental draft calendar. A preliminary injunction, if granted, would provide temporary relief while the underlying dispute proceeds, though the scope would depend on the court’s order. The earlier hearing date gives both sides less time to prepare but could yield a decision with enough lead time for any next steps before the June 22 application deadline.

The assignment of Judge Curry may also ease perceptions of institutional bias. Case records show the lawsuit initially appeared before Judge Phillip Hays, who holds both undergraduate and law degrees from Texas Tech. Curry, by contrast, is a retired senior judge from Tarrant County and is not affiliated with Texas Tech University. That shift reduces the appearance of home-court ties and focuses the dispute on the legal questions before the court.

The NCAA’s legal team and Sorsby’s counsel are expected to prepare arguments on an expedited schedule. Any ruling on June 1 could be followed by additional motions or an appeal, depending on the outcome. The court’s handling of timing and scope will be pivotal, given the narrow window created by the supplemental draft application deadline.

Timeline pressures around the supplemental draft

June 22 deadline shapes the court calendar

In court paperwork filed this week, Sorsby’s lawyers asked for a June 15 hearing to align the case schedule with the June 22 NFL supplemental draft application cutoff. By setting the hearing for June 1, the court effectively created more runway for a ruling and for either party to consider next steps within the draft timeline. The compressed preparation window raises the stakes for both sides to present clear, concise arguments.

While a preliminary injunction would not resolve the underlying dispute, it could determine Sorsby’s near-term options. The court’s decision on temporary relief will influence whether his path to the supplemental draft remains viable, or whether he must wait for further proceedings.

Judge assignment and perceptions of neutrality

Curry’s background outside Lubbock

Public records indicate Judge Curry earned an undergraduate degree from the University of Texas at Arlington and a law degree from the University of Houston. His appointment removes direct ties to Texas Tech and Lubbock County that were present with the prior judge, Phillip Hays, a Texas Tech alumnus at both the undergraduate and law levels. The reassignment narrows any arguments about local influence and centers the case on the merits of Sorsby’s request for temporary relief.

Attention now turns to how the court frames the standard for a preliminary injunction and how each side addresses the balance of harms, likelihood of success, and timing. Those factors, weighed against the looming supplemental draft deadline, will determine the immediate trajectory of the case.

The key date is set: if the court issues a ruling on or soon after June 1, the parties will have a short but workable window to react before June 22. Observers will watch for the scope of any order and whether it triggers additional filings or an appeal.