243 F. Supp. 3d 1217
D. Utah2017Background
- Plaintiff Michael Pliuskaitis was a USA Swimming coach who, following an anonymous report during his divorce, was accused of sexual misconduct with a minor swimmer and was permanently banned by USA Swimming’s National Board of Review (NBOR) and Board of Directors.
- The NBOR hearing (June–August 2012) resulted in a lifetime ban; Plaintiff appealed internally and his name was posted on USA Swimming’s public “Banned for Life” list with some erroneous code citations.
- Plaintiff pursued arbitration, which concluded in March 2014: the arbitrator found the NBOR’s determinations arbitrary and capricious, ordered removal from the banned list and reinstatement, and denied any award of damages.
- USA Swimming complied by removing Plaintiff from the banned list; neither party sought judicial review of the arbitration award within the FAA’s three‑month window.
- Plaintiff filed this federal suit in March 2015 asserting defamation, breach of duty, violations of the Sports Act, breach of contract, breach of good faith and fair dealing, and tortious interference; USA Swimming moved to dismiss under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether federal courts have jurisdiction given the Sports Act | Claims are state-law and do not concern Olympic eligibility or USOC participation | Sports Act gives NGBs exclusive authority over eligibility disputes and preempts state-law claims | Dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction: state-law claims challenging eligibility are preempted by the Sports Act |
| Whether arbitrated matters preclude this suit (res judicata) | Arbitrator did not address Plaintiff’s state-law claims (e.g., defamation, damages) so claim preclusion shouldn't apply | Arbitration award was a final judgment on the merits between identical parties covering the same transaction | Claims for breach of duty, contract, good faith, and interference barred by res judicata |
| Timeliness of defamation claim | Continuing publication tolled the one‑year statute; claim timely | Single-publication rule: statute runs from first public posting in Feb 2013; suit filed March 2015 is untimely | Defamation claim dismissed as time‑barred under Utah’s one‑year statute and single‑publication rule |
| Whether extraordinary circumstances justify judicial intervention despite preemption | Plaintiff points to alleged rule breaches by USA Swimming and analogies to rare cases allowing intervention | Court stresses narrowness of exception; plaintiff failed to plead specific, clear rule breaches causing imminent irreparable harm | No extraordinary circumstances shown; judicial intervention not appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- Slaney v. Int’l Amateur Athletic Fed’n, 244 F.3d 580 (7th Cir. 2001) (state-law claims challenging eligibility decisions are preempted by the Sports Act)
- Lee v. U.S. Taekwondo Union, 331 F. Supp. 2d 1252 (D. Haw. 2004) (Sports Act preempts state-law claims that seek reinstatement/contest eligibility; federal anti-discrimination claims may survive)
- Shepherd v. U.S. Olympic Comm., 464 F. Supp. 2d 1072 (D. Colo. 2006) (discrimination claims under federal statutes may not be preempted by the Sports Act)
- Harding v. U.S. Figure Skating Ass’n, 851 F. Supp. 1476 (D. Or. 1994) (rare injunction where an association clearly breached its rules and imminent irreparable harm was shown)
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375 (1994) (federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction)