567 F.Supp.3d 378
N.D.N.Y.2021Background
- Plaintiff — a former Olympic speedskater — alleges Defendant Andrew Gabel sexually abused her when she was 15 during training for the 1998 Olympics, over several months at locations including Saratoga Winter Club and the U.S. Olympic Education Center (USOEC).
- Claims brought under New York's Child Victims Act (CVA) include negligence, assault and battery, negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED), and intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED); CVA revived time‑barred childhood sexual‑abuse claims for a limited window.
- Defendants include: Andrew Gabel; U.S. Speedskating (USS); USOPC (removed the case to federal court); USOEC; Saratoga Winter Club. Pending motions to dismiss were filed by USS, USOEC, and Gabel.
- USS moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and failure to state NIED/IIED claims; USOEC moved under Rule 17 (not a suable entity) and Rule 12 defenses; Gabel challenged the CVA's constitutionality and moved to dismiss NIED/IIED for failure to state a claim.
- Court holdings: denied USS's motion (found specific jurisdiction over USS and permitted negligence/NIED/IIED claims to proceed); granted USOEC's Rule 17 motion (dismissed USOEC for lack of suability/identification of officers/associates); denied Gabel's motion (CVA constitutional; NIED and IIED survive). Case referred to Magistrate Judge Hummel for pretrial matters.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Personal jurisdiction over USS | USS had sufficient contacts in NY (members, events) and Gabel acted as USS agent; specific jurisdiction exists | USS: headquarters out of state; no general jurisdiction; Gabel was not USS agent | Court: denied 12(b)(2); no general jurisdiction but specific jurisdiction exists because facts plausibly show an agency relationship and forum contacts are tied to the claim |
| Failure to state NIED/IIED (USS) | Alleged USS breached duties (allowed access, failed to supervise/train/warn), causing genuine severe emotional harm | USS: claims duplicative of negligence; Rule 9(b) heightened pleading; insufficient particularity | Court: denied 12(b)(6); negligence and NIED/IIED pleaded with sufficient distinct elements and particularity; Rule 9(b) inapplicable |
| Suability of USOEC (Rule 17) | USOEC operated training facility and was under control/funding of USOPC/USS; is an unincorporated association or a suable entity | USOEC: not a legal entity that can be sued | Court: granted Rule 17 dismissal; plaintiff failed to plead USOEC as a corporation or properly identify/name president/treasurer/associates required for suing an unincorporated association under NY law |
| Constitutionality of CVA (Gabel) | CVA is a reasonable legislative response to remedy injustice of time‑barred childhood sexual‑abuse claims | Gabel: CVA violates due process and NY limitations‑extension standards; revivals are extraordinary | Court: denied motion; CVA is a constitutional claim‑revival statute enacted to remedy an injustice under New York and federal due process principles |
| Failure to state NIED/IIED (Gabel) | Plaintiff alleges grooming, abuse, severe emotional/physical harm, and outrageous conduct causing severe distress | Gabel: NIED/IIED insufficiently pleaded | Court: denied 12(b)(6); complaint adequately alleges duty/breach/causation/genuineness for NIED and extreme/outrageous conduct, intent/disregard, causation, and severe harm for IIED |
Key Cases Cited
- Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Robertson-Ceco Corp., 84 F.3d 560 (2d Cir.) (general personal jurisdiction framework)
- Sonera Holding B.V. v. Cukurova Holding A.S., 750 F.3d 221 (2d Cir.) (specific/jurisdiction and forum contacts analysis)
- Daimler AG v. Bauman, 571 U.S. 117 (U.S. 2014) (limits on general jurisdiction; "at home" standard)
- Brown v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 814 F.3d 619 (2d Cir.) (assessing local contacts in context of global activity)
- Mayes v. Leipziger, 674 F.2d 178 (2d Cir.) (agency and New York long-arm statute interpretation)
- Chloe v. Queen Bee of Beverly Hills, LLC, 616 F.3d 158 (2d Cir.) (minimum contacts and reasonableness inquiries)
- Asahi Metal Indus. Co. v. Superior Court, 480 U.S. 102 (U.S. 1987) (factors for reasonableness/fair play in jurisdiction inquiry)
- Francis v. Kings Park Manor, Inc., 992 F.3d 67 (2d Cir.) (elements of NIED under New York law)
- Howell v. New York Post Co., 81 N.Y.2d 115 (N.Y. 1993) (elements of IIED under New York law)
- Matter of World Trade Ctr. Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litig., 30 N.Y.3d 377 (N.Y. 2017) (standards for constitutionality of claim‑revival statutes)
- Zumpano v. Quinn, 6 N.Y.3d 666 (N.Y. 2006) (limitations/extension background cited and discussed)