Brendan Sorsby’s lawsuit against the NCAA centers on a clash between wagering rules and mental health. The Texas Tech QB’s legal team argues that the NCAA is “weaponizing” a gambling disorder instead of treating it as a medical issue. That’s why the lawsuit, filed in Lubbock County, seeks an emergency injunction to restore Sorsby’s eligibility for 2026. After a hearing date was announced, there has been a new development in the Sorsby v. NCAA case.

On Wednesday, Judge Phillip Hays recused himself from Sorsby’s case. The Lubbock native holds both his undergraduate and law degrees from Texas Tech. Following Hays’ recusal, the presiding judge of Texas’s 9th Administrative Judicial Region, Judge Ana E. Estevez, assigned the case to Judge Ken Curry on Thursday.

Judge Curry is a retired senior district judge from Fort Worth. He holds his degrees from UT-Arlington and the Houston Law Center. By opting for Curry, Judge Estevez effectively insulated the preliminary hearing from any further claims of local conflict of interest or alumni bias. But Texas Tech grads could still hear Brendan Sorsby’s case. If either Sorsby or the NCAA appeals Curry’s upcoming ruling, the case will be heard by the Texas Seventh Court of Appeals.

All four justices there are Texas Tech Law graduates, as reported by Ryan Autullo. But Judge Curry is scheduled to preside over the temporary injunction hearing on June 1 at 9:00 a.m. CT in Lubbock County’s 99th District Court, according to court dockets surfaced by Pete Nakos. Though Sorsby’s legal team filed paperwork requesting a hearing by June 15.

This gives the QB’s attorneys a crucial buffer before the June 22 NFL supplemental draft deadline. But they must prove he faces “irreparable harm” without immediate relief to win the temporary injunction. Meanwhile, the NCAA must prove why the Texas Tech QB should remain permanently ineligible due to his history of sports wagering.

Here’s where the lawsuit directly attacks the NCAA, labeling the permanent ban “deeply hypocritical” and pointing out that the organization profits from sportsbooks through a data-distribution partnership. Yet, it can’t be overlooked that Sorsby placed more than 10,000 bets over a four-year window, and at the height of his addiction, he averaged 20 bets per day.

However, Brendan Sorsby’s legal team emphasized that he never bet on a game he played in, never manipulated outcomes, and strictly bet on his team to win. Still, his betting on his team triggered the NCAA’s permanent ban.

Brendan Sorsby’s absolute ‘red line’

Before his breakout 2025 season with the Bearcats, the Cincinnati athletic department was alerted to Sorsby’s gambling. But they stated that they didn’t knowingly play an ineligible player. Before his time with the Bearcats, he spent one season at Indiana. During his 2022 redshirt freshman season, he placed bets on the Hoosiers to win or on specific teammates to hit over-prop targets.

“Student-athletes who engage in activities to influence the outcomes of their own games or knowingly provide information to individuals involved in sports betting activities will potentially face permanent loss of collegiate eligibility in all sports,” read the NCAA guidelines on sports betting. “This would also apply to student-athletes who wager on their own games or on other sports at their own schools.”

However, Brendan Sorsby’s betting habits were erratic and spanned global sports like Romanian soccer leagues, Turkish basketball, and more. His lawyers used this key detail to prove that he has a legitimate clinical disorder.

But the timing is the ultimate leverage in Sorsby’s case. The QB’s legal team, led by antitrust attorney Jeffrey Kessler, claims the NCAA deliberately “slow-walked” its reinstatement decision. Now, if the court does not grant a temporary injunction on June 1, the Red Raiders’ QB can face a career-altering dilemma.