USA Swimming and the U.S. Center for SafeSport are headed to court over a legal dispute regarding which organization is on the hook for damages from a case filed in November 2023.
The underlying case filed last November, entitled Doe v. United States Center for SafeSport Inc et al, alleges numerous defects in SafeSport’s investigation and that the alleged defects resulted in financial harm to the plaintiffs.
The case, filed by the swimmer and their parent, alleges that the plaintiffs reported problems with a SafeSport investigation to USA Swimming, but USA Swimming declined to interfere with the ongoing investigation (NGBs are prevented by federal law from interfering with a SafeSport investigation).
The complaint then alleges that USA Swimming sent out an email titled “Notice of Allegations and Temporary Measures for (text redacted),” which reflected SafeSport’s “imposition of ‘temporary measures’ undertaken pursuant to its obligations under the MSA.”
The MSA (Master Services Agreement) is designed to help govern the relationship between SafeSport, the United States Olympic & Paralympic Committee (USOPC) and the USOPC’s national governing bodies (NGBs). The dispute comes down to whether or not a jury determines the MSA says the USOPC or USA Swimming is liable for the damages in the underlying case.
The complaint brought four actions against both SafeSport and USA Swimming: (1) declaratory relief, (2) Breach of the Washington Consumer Protection Act, (3) Breach of the Washington Constitution-Breach of Privacy, and (4) intentional infliction of emotional distress.
The damages from these actions have been incurred by USA Swimming. Counsel for the national governing body sent a letter to SafeSport on December 19 “demanding” that SafeSport compensate USA Swimming for all costs and fees in connection with the lawsuit as required by the MSA.
However, SafeSport’s Counsel disputed the fact that USA Swimming had the legal standing to request compensation in this respect. The case briefing says that SafeSport is “taking the position that its indemnification (compensation) obligation is owed only to the USOPC and not to any NGB,” thus declining to accept USA Swimming’s demand for compensation.
USA Swimming’s claim is that SafeSport has breached the MSA by failing to accept its indemnification obligation, thus demanding a trial by jury for determination on if it is owed compensation from SafeSport or not.
The case was filed on March 7, 2024, in Denver County. A court date has been set for April 7, 2025.
Judge granted motion for summary judgement. Case over. Parent and swimmer lose.
Why should plaintiff win when he was bad actor? Center was suppose to defend swimming and didn’t. Just legally protecting their rights.
Both USA Swimming and Safe Sport s*ck! They both ignored coach bullying, inappropriate language and behavior with minor swimmers for years. I hope the plaintiff is successful in court.
Safesport lost ALL credibility when they didn’t ban Dick Shoulberg for what he did at Germantown Academy. ASCA’s John Leonard should have also been banned for his disappearance of the organization’s membership money when he “retired”. Unfortunately, the ASCA board at the time let him get away with it and lost any credibility.
Neither USA Swimming or Safe Sport should have any financial liability here. There are swimmers that deserve to be suspended, and generally what we are reading is not the full story as to what happened. This swimmer did NOT get suspended for a simple slap on the butt in the locker room.
Were you there to make such a generalization? It happens and unfortunately if the parents and/or coach want to report that behavior to SafeSport then SafeSport will act! In this case, the teen has refused to admit any wrongdoing and has not been able to compete in USA swimming sanctioned events. The question needs to be asked is this what safe sport was set up to do? Resolve stupid locker room behavior that should be handled through the coach? I have lived this personally and this is a travesty and it’s happening around USA Swimming on clubs when swimmers and parents want to be vindictive and hurt other swimmers on the team.
The swim community where this happened is small (comparatively speaking) and this case is well known. Boys did not want to be in the locker room with this individual because of his behavior and no parent wanted their sons to be there either, and this behavior was beyond the club coach “handling it”. No other club in the area was willing to take the swimmer because of his behavior. So yes, this statement was made based on personal knowledge and not just speculation.
The real question that we’re trying to get to here is when does safe sport get involved and what is the mission of safe sport in reference to what your response was that this individuals behavior was so inappropriate that he has had to move to several teams and the other swimmers do not want to be in the locker room with him because of the behavior. Well first, isn’t it the coaches responsibility to keep an individual who’s being unsafe in the locker room out of the locker room? Coaches can suspend swimmers from using the locker room. Case in point, a swim team that I’m familiar with in a very small community as well. The entire team was… Read more »
Reading the article, it appears that damages have already been assessed in court. Now it is just a fight over who has to pay it, so it is USA Swimming or Safe Sport. One or the other, or both.
I am hoping neither SafeSport or USA Swimming is forced to pay anything to this swimmer or his family. He deserves to be suspended, and college coaches deserve to be warned and should have full access to SafeSport information.
I know in reality swimswam was likely responsibly taking time for due diligence, but my head canon is they learned about this story through the rumor mill of the comment section on the USA swimming response
“It’s the end of the world as we know, and I feel fine…” 🍿
Pass the popcorn
Nothing screams “functional” like NGB’s taking their watchdog organizations to court.