Ohio Supreme Court: Feister brothers' football eligibility case reaches final stage

Seven days. That is how long the Ohio High School Athletic Association (OHSAA) waited after an appellate court issued an emergency order allowing two brothers to play high school football before filing a complaint in the Ohio Supreme Court.

The dispute between the association and Brayton and Brydon Feister is now before the state's highest court. OHSAA is asking the Supreme Court to vacate a Fifth District Court of Appeals order that permitted the Massillon Washington High School athletes to play varsity football for the remainder of the 2026 season. Attorneys for the brothers have filed a motion to intervene, urging the Supreme Court to preserve that appellate ruling.

Ohio Attorney General Andy Wilson, representing the Fifth District judges, criticized the association's strategy in a release shared Wednesday by the law firm Plakas Mannos. Wilson stated that OHSAA attempted a desperate move to overturn the injunction and effectively called the wrong play, exposing its action to dismissal.

In court records, OHSAA defended its timeline, noting it filed its complaint and emergency motion seven days after the Oct. 16 order. The association argued that preparing these filings in four business days while litigating two other injunction hearings was not an unreasonable delay. It claimed the lower court order threatened the integrity of the post-season tournament and that it had no adequate remedy other than seeking immediate review.

OHSAA also argued that the Fifth District lacks jurisdiction because the Oct. 9 entry denying a preliminary injunction was not a final, appealable order. The association contended that any appeal would be decided after the season ends, meaning relief would arrive too late to restore a fair tournament for its member schools. Additionally, OHSAA stated it sued the individual judges of the Fifth District rather than the court itself.

In response, the Fifth District judges filed a motion to dismiss the Oct. 23 complaint. They argued that OHSAA filed an emergency request instead of a standard appeal and waited too long to act. The judges noted that a court cannot sue or be sued in its own right without express statutory authority. They maintained they have discretion to determine if the trial court's denial met requirements for an appealable order.

The legal conflict stems from a Stark County judge's decision last week to end a temporary restraining order. The judge ruled that the Feister brothers, formerly of Archbishop Hoban, did not follow state transfer rules and should be benched. The family purchased a Massillon home on April 29 but applied for transfer on July 29. OHSAA cited March wrestling discipline and contacts with other schools as evidence that the desire to transfer compelled the move.

The case is part of a broader legal fight involving six Tigers football players who sued to block OHSAA's transfer rule. OHSAA cleared one transfer from Euclid, denied the Feisters, and left three other cases pending. The Supreme Court ordered responses to the brothers' intervention motion by noon Friday, Oct. 30, with no extensions allowed.