Court interprets student athlete transfer rule

A rule governing the eligibility of student athletes who transfer schools does not apply to the minor plaintiff under the unique facts of this case.

Transfer rule

“As both parties appear to agree, the primary issue in this case turns on the interpretation of the VHSL Transfer Rule (the ‘Rule’) and whether the Rule can be construed to apply to what both counsel have characterized as the unique facts of this case. …

“[T]he Transfer Rule restricts the ability of a student athlete to participate in team sports at one school, then transfer and participate in sports at the new school.

“By its express terms, the Transfer Rule provides in pertinent part that ‘[t]he student shall not have enrolled in one high school and subsequently transferred to and enrolled in another high school without a corresponding change in the residence of his/her parents, parent or guardian.’

“To amplify the written Rule, VHSL has also enacted several ‘Notes’ clarifying that:

“‘A: The provisions of the Transfer Rule apply to students transferring from one school to another, including transfers from a private school to a public school as well as transfers from one public school to another.

“‘B: Any student who transfers from a non VHSL member school (i.e., a non-member VHSL non-public school or a school from a state outside Virginia) to a VHSL non­public member school shall be eligible immediately, provided that student was continuously enrolled in the school from which he/she is transferring for one calendar year prior to such transfer.

“‘D: A student who attends one member school, transfers to another member school, and participates at the new school, is ineligible upon their return to the former school, in the same school year, for 365 days from the date of enrollment in the latter school, regardless of any move on the part of parent/guardian.’ Emphasis added. …

“As written, the VHSL Transfer Rule and the attendant ‘Notes’ are not ambiguous. When read together, its provisions are clear and explicit. Such reading, however, also shows that the enacted Rule does not cover every situation.”

Timeline

“During the 2021-2022 school year, C.M. was enrolled and a full-time student at Glenvar High School. During the summer of 2022, C.M. withdrew from Glenvar and transferred to and enrolled at Smith Mountain Lake Christian Academy (SMLCA).

“There appears no dispute that prior to his 2022 enrollment at SMLCA, C.M. had been enrolled at Glenvar for the immediately preceding school year. Following his transfer, C.M. was enrolled in and attended classes at or through SMLCA during the fall semester of 2022.

“In January 2023, C.M. transferred back to and re-enrolled at Glenvar. Since his re­ enrollment at Glenvar, C.M. has been continuously enrolled at Glenvar and has attended Glenvar in furtherance of his intention to graduate and obtain his diploma from Glenvar.

“During the 2023 portion of the wrestling season, C.M. was permitted to participate on the varsity wrestling team at Glenvar. The stipulated evidence showed that while maintaining his enrollment at Glenvar, C.M. also continued his enrollment at SMLCA and, during the 2023 fall semester, C.M. participated on the SMLCA football team.

“After SMLCA’s 2023 football season ended, C.M., still a Glenvar student, attempted to participate on the Glenvar wrestling team.

“In response to concerns expressed by the principal at Glenvar, VHSL investigated and determined that Plaintiff was ineligible to compete on the Glenvar wrestling team because his participation would violate the ‘Transfer Rule.’”

Dual enrollment

“While ‘dual enrollment’ is not a term contained in the VHSL Rules that are relevant to this case, there appears nothing in the VHSL rules that prohibits a student’s simultaneous enrollment at two schools.

“Furthermore, if the simultaneous enrollment permits a student to pursue particular classes or a course of study available at one school that is not available at the other, dual enrollment would appear consonant with the educational objective of encouraging and enabling a student to enjoy a broad and rich academic experience during his high school years.

“Thus, in the context of this case, the notion of ‘dual enrollment’ does not contravene public policy.

“The VHSL use of the ‘transferred to and enrolled in’ language in its enactment of the Transfer Rule, suggests that ‘to transfer’ and ‘to enroll’ are distinct concepts that have different meanings within the contemplation of the Rule.

“Conspicuously, the VHSL Rules do not define transfer as a prerequisite to enrollment and do not define enrollment to be exclusive.

“Therefore, as written the VHSL Transfer Rule cannot be construed to mean that a student who is simultaneously enrolled at a VHSL member high school and a non-VHSL member high school has, by virtue of such enrollment, transferred from the VHSL member school for purposes of athletic eligibility. …

“Accordingly, so long as C.M. remained enrolled at Glenvar, a proscribed transfer as contemplated by the VHSL Transfer Rule has not been shown, and since no transfer occurred, the Transfer Rule does not apply in this case.”

The court has previously entered a temporary injunction preventing VHSL from denying C.M. athletic eligibility at Glenvar. “[T]he temporary injunction previously entered shall be, and is hereby, extended until April 1, 2024 or until the end of Glenvar’s current varsity wrestling season, whichever last occurs, and at such time, Plaintiff’s declaratory judgment action shall be dismissed.”

C.M. a minor by Carl Miller, his father and next friend v. Virginia High School League, Case No. CL23-1355, Jan. 23, 2024. Roanoke County Circuit Court (Swanson). Christopher E. Collins, Jim H. Guynn Jr. for the parties. VLW 024-8-016, 8 pp.