NCAA D-1 Tennis Player Files Explosive Objection to NIL Settlement Against Duke University, Citing Broken Promises and Retaliation

In a dramatic twist to the ongoing College Athlete NIL Litigation, Duke University tennis player Samuel Landau, an NCAA Division I Athlete, has filed a limited objection to the proposed House settlement, accusing the school of luring him with false promises of NIL payments and retaliating when he spoke out.

$45K NIL Deal, Potential False Rumors, and Anti-Semitic Accusations Surface in Filing

The objection, which was filed on Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Oakland division, claims that Duke Men’s Tennis Head Coach Ramsey Smith promised Landau $45,000 in NIL compensation in addition to his scholarship to secure his transfer to Duke in late 2023.

According to the objection, Coach Smith assured Landau and his family multiple times, including in an April 2024 text message to Landau’s mother, that the player would be “well taken care of.” However, once Landau joined the program, he alleges that the NIL money never came through.

The objection, filed by Landau’s attorney, Rodger Landau, paints a troubling picture of alleged misconduct within Duke’s athletic department. It accuses the university of retaliating after Landau raised concerns about the NIL payments. According to the filing,

Coach Smith allegedly spread false rumors that Landau had a drug problem, citing a false statement from University of Texas coach Bruce Berque, which has since been denied in writing by the Texas program.

The filing alleges that Duke officials wrongly suspected Landau, who is Jewish, of running a social media account that was critical of his own team members, invoking what the family describes as an anti-Semitic trope. Landau argues that the current language in the proposed settlement is too broad and could allow Power 5 schools to escape liability for NIL misconduct, including false inducements and broken promises.

He is urging the court to revise the settlement to include expanded audit rights and establish an arbitration process for student-athletes to seek compensation for unpaid NIL deals. He proposes allowing arbitrators to impose penalties of up to $5 million per athlete for proven fraud or retaliation.

If such revisions aren’t made, Landau is calling for Duke University to be excluded from the House Settlement altogether. He argues that Duke, with its $12 billion endowment, has demonstrated an unwillingness to honor NIL commitments and has weaponized its institutional power to suppress dissent.

The NIL era has meant that college athletes can now earn money from their name, image, and likeness through endorsements and sponsorships. Earlier, college athletes were not paid and did not gain monetary benefits from the revenue generated by prestigious college sports programs.