ANN ARBOR, Mich. – Former University of Michigan football coach Chris Partridge has filed a federal lawsuit against the university, its Board of Regents, and Athletic Director Warde Manuel, alleging that his 2023 termination was unlawful, politically motivated, and permanently damaged his career.
The complaint, filed March 11, 2026, in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, accuses the defendants of violating Partridge’s constitutional rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments and seeks damages for lost employment, reputational harm and emotional distress.
Recommended Videos
What sparked the lawsuit
The suit centers on events surrounding the NCAA’s 2023 investigation into an alleged sign-stealing scheme orchestrated by former Michigan football staff member Connor Stalions.
Partridge was fired Nov. 17, 2023, the same day Michigan and then-head coach Jim Harbaugh dismissed their lawsuit against the Big Ten Conference and Commissioner Tony Petitti.
According to the complaint, Partridge’s termination had nothing to do with the sign-stealing scheme itself.
Instead, the lawsuit alleges he was fired after advising a Michigan football player to consult an attorney before being interviewed by NCAA investigators, advice his own supervisor had suggested in a staff meeting days earlier.
“Contrary to misinformation communicated by the University’s Athletics Department following Partridge’s termination, Partridge was not fired for destroying evidence or interfering with the NCAA’s ‘sign-stealing’ investigation,” the complaint states. “Nor was Partridge fired for telling a player to be dishonest in an NCAA interview.”
The NCAA’s own investigation, which concluded with a Public Infractions Decision issued Aug. 15, 2025, issued no punishment against Partridge.
The only infraction noted in the report was that he had sent text messages to a recruit before it was permissible.
The alleged backroom deal
The lawsuit paints a detailed picture of what it describes as a high-pressure political maneuver in the days leading up to a scheduled Nov. 17, 2023, injunction hearing in Washtenaw County Circuit Court.
According to the complaint, Big Ten Commissioner Petitti approached Manuel on the afternoon or evening of Nov. 15, 2023, with what the lawsuit describes as uncorroborated, second-hand information about Partridge.
The suit alleges Petitti threatened to present that information in open court, potentially embarrassing Michigan and sinking its chances of winning the injunction.
The complaint alleges Manuel then offered to fire Partridge and dismiss the lawsuit in exchange for Petitti agreeing not to disclose the information publicly.
On Nov. 16, 2023, Michigan and Harbaugh announced they had resolved their litigation with the Big Ten and accepted the three-game suspension.
The following day, Manuel terminated Partridge.
“Partridge was a scapegoat who was wrongly fired simply because he told a player he had the right to have counsel, something the University should have told the players themselves if it had been protecting their interests instead of trying to curry favor with the NCAA,” the complaint states.
The termination meeting
According to the suit, when Partridge arrived for the meeting with Manuel and Athletics Department Chief of Staff Doug Gnodtke on Nov. 17, 2023, Manuel immediately told him he was being terminated.
The complaint says Manuel told Partridge he had been informed that Partridge advised a player “not to be forthright” with NCAA investigators, a claim Partridge denied.
The suit alleges that Manuel refused to allow Partridge to respond before the decision was finalized.
It also alleges that Manuel told Partridge that Michigan would not issue a public statement about his termination.
Hours later, the university issued one anyway, the complaint states.
The suit further alleges that one or more Michigan Athletics Department employees and at least one Board of Regents member falsely told sportswriters that Partridge had been fired for destroying evidence on Stalions’ computer.
Those reports were picked up by multiple national news organizations.
“Michigan’s senior officials took no such action” to correct the record, the complaint states, calling the university’s inaction a deliberate choice that caused “permanent, lasting, irreparable damage” to Partridge’s reputation.
The November 13 staff meeting
Central to Partridge’s account is a Nov. 13, 2023, staff meeting called by Michigan Senior Assistant General Counsel Debra Kowich.
The complaint says the meeting was held the Monday after Michigan and Harbaugh filed their lawsuit against the Big Ten.
According to the suit, Kowich directed coaches not to discuss the NCAA investigation with anyone, including players.
When Harbaugh asked Kowich to put the directive in writing twice, she refused.
When Harbaugh stated that anyone being interviewed by the NCAA should have a lawyer, Kowich disagreed.
The complaint alleges Kowich and Gnodtke never told the coaching staff that NCAA bylaws explicitly permit individuals being interviewed by NCAA enforcement staff to be represented by an attorney.
After the meeting, a Michigan football player approached Partridge, told him he was nervous about his upcoming NCAA interview, and asked for advice. Partridge told him to speak with his parents about getting a lawyer and to be honest, according to the lawsuit.
NCAA hearing testimony, investigation findings
The NCAA conducted a hearing on June 6 and 7, 2025. Partridge, Manuel, and Michigan’s Chief Compliance Officer Elizabeth Heinrich all testified.
Harbaugh did not attend or participate.
The complaint says Manuel testified that he “loved” Partridge, thought he did a great job, and acknowledged he was under immense pressure when he decided to fire him.
The suit says Manuel told Partridge after the hearing, “I’m sorry you had to go through this.”
The NCAA’s Public Infractions Decision, quoted at length in the complaint, described the relationship between Michigan’s football staff and its compliance office as “challenging at best,” noting that football staff members regularly questioned compliance staff authority and viewed them as a “roadblock.”
The decision concluded that Michigan’s failure to monitor violations was Level II, noting that the school’s chief compliance officer “faced an insurmountable challenge with Harbaugh and his football program.”
Career fallout, alleged blacklisting
Despite being cleared by the NCAA, the lawsuit says Partridge has been unable to return to college football.
The complaint alleges that Manuel personally intervened to prevent at least one Division I program from hiring Partridge, contacting that school’s athletic director and recommending against the hire.
The athletic director then overruled his own head coach’s decision to offer Partridge the job, according to the suit.
Following his termination, Partridge joined the NFL and won Super Bowl LX as outside linebackers coach for the Seattle Seahawks.
He was subsequently promoted to run game coordinator.
But the complaint says Partridge’s true goal has always been college football, and he believes Manuel’s actions have permanently closed that door.
“Throughout the entire two-and-a-half-year ordeal, Partridge has acted with dignity and restraint, complying with all requests made to him by the University and the NCAA, and never commenting publicly despite being repeatedly publicly disparaged, humiliated, and defamed,” the complaint states.
Legal claims, relief sought
The lawsuit brings three counts against the defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1983:
- Denial of due process against the university and the Board of Regents, alleging that Partridge was fired without notice, without an explanation of the evidence against him, and without any opportunity to respond, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Failure to train and supervise Manuel individually and to properly oversee staff, including Stalions and Harbaugh, created the conditions that led to Partridge’s wrongful termination.
- First Amendment retaliation against Manuel individually, alleging Partridge’s advice to the player was protected speech as a private individual on a matter of public concern, and that Manuel fired and blacklisted him in retaliation for that speech.
Partridge is seeking compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, and all other relief the court deems appropriate.
The case has been assigned to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.
The University of Michigan, the Board of Regents, and Manuel have not yet publicly responded to the lawsuit.