"The only institution that acted against him " UCLA acted against him - by irresponsibility suspending him for issues regarding supposed racial insensitivity,

"The only institution that acted against him " UCLA acted against him - by irresponsibility suspending him for issues regarding supposed racial insensitivity, which were without merit. His suspension caused him to lose revenue, hence the problem. The suspension could be a form of libel i.e. false information published about him, causing him damages. I should add that it's obviously more complicated if he's 'cleared' of something but the libelous damanges linger anyhow.