Michigan Coach's Ex Demands Records in FOIA Lawsuit

The fallout from Sherrone Moore’s firing continues to ripple through Ann Arbor, and this time it’s playing out in the courtroom over who gets to see what happened behind closed doors.

Paige Shiver, Moore’s former assistant, filed suit against the University of Michigan on Wednesday, claiming the school is stonewalling her attempts to access investigation records related to their relationship and the circumstances that led to the head coach’s termination in December 2025. She’s not asking nicely anymore—she’s invoking the Michigan Freedom of Information Act and demanding a court order.

Here’s where it gets messy. Shiver first requested the materials back in February 2026: audio, video, and transcripts of interviews involving herself, her father, and Moore. The university denied her, citing an ongoing investigation. When she tried again last month with a narrower request, Michigan claimed her submission was“overly broad and vague.”She also specifically sought emails between Moore and athletic director Warde Manuel containing the words“affair,”“discipline,”“abortion,”“pregnancy,”and“baby”—documents the school labeled“exempt information.”She even requested communications sent to the university’s outside counsel, Jenner&Block, and meeting recordings. All denied.

The stakes here go beyond document disclosure. Shiver’s complaint also alleges she experienced sex-based discrimination and worked in a hostile environment. In previous statements, she’s detailed that Moore got her pregnant and she underwent an abortion due to medical complications. Moore was arrested hours after his firing when Shiver reported he threatened to harm himself at her apartment. He ultimately pleaded no contest to malicious use of a telecommunication device in a domestic relationship and trespassing, receiving 18 months of probation.

The question now is whether Michigan can keep those investigation files locked away. Public universities operate under different rules than private ones—they’re bound by state freedom of information laws that generally require transparency unless specific exemptions apply. Shiver’s argument: she’s the subject of these records, she has a legitimate interest in what they contain, and the university’s excuses don’t hold water. The court will have to decide if that’s enough to pry open the file cabinet.

What happens in this lawsuit could have ripple effects for how universities handle investigation records in similar situations.