Notes of Decisions
Doe v. United States Ctr. for SafeSport Inc, No. 3:23-cv-06067, 2024 WL 3924663 (W.D. Wash. Aug. 23, 2024).
· cites it 16× “” 36 U.S.C. § 220541 (a)(1)(B). 19 During its investigation, SafeSport issued a “No Contact Directive,” which 20 directed that Doe’s child be prohibited from communicating in any way with the female 21 athletes during the pendency of the investigation.”
McKenzie v. United States Tennis Ass'n, No. 6:22-cv-00615 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 7, 2023).
· cites it 12× “As more fully explained below, the majority of the motion resolves on the applicability and interpretation of a federal statute—36 U.S.C. § 220541(f)(4)(C). See Doc. Nos.”
Dames, No. 1:25-cv-03503 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 5, 2026).
· cites it 10× “This Court has jurisdiction over this matter because it is a civil action originally brought in the Illinois state court against the Center and was thus remova- ble to the district court under the SafeSport Act, 36 U.S.C. § 220541 (d)(3)(A). See Dames v.”
Strine v. United States Ctr. for Safe Sport, The, No. 1:24-cv-02329 (D. Colo. Sept. 25, 2025).
· cites it 9× “1 at 26, ¶ 105; (2) violation of the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateurs Sports Act (the “Amateur Sports Act”), 36 U.S.C. § 220541 (a)(1)(H), for failure to provide a hearing and other procedural safeguards before imposing the Temporary Measures, see id.”
Dames v. U.S. Ctr. for SafeSport, No. 1:25-cv-03503 (N.D. Ill. May 7, 2025).
· cites it 8× “” followed by the docket entry number and, if needed, a page or paragraph number. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter because it is a civil action brought in the Illinois state court against the Center and is therefore removable to the district court under the SafeSport…”
Harris v. SafeSport, Inc, No. 4:22-cv-01063 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 17, 2023).
· cites it 7× “1] Defendant filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint asserting that: (1) Plaintiff’s claim fails as a matter of law because “Congress has determined that [Defendant] is immune from damages for slander” pursuant to 36 U.S.C. § 220541 (d)(1); and (2) Plaintiff’s claim is…”
Nothstein v. USA Cycling, 499 F. Supp. 3d 101 (E.D. Pa. 2020).
· cites it 7× “In regard to placing the plaintiff on the list of suspended riders, the court concludes that the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of 2017 (“SSAA”), 36 U.S.C. § 220541 , limits the defendant’s liability and renders the defendant immune…”
Charles Reno White v. U.S. Ctr. for SafeSport, No. 4:24-cv-08028 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 29, 2025).
· cites it 7× “23, 2024) (quoting 36 U.S.C. § 220541 (a)(1)(B); edits 1 body and develop policies and procedures to resolve allegations of sexual abuse within its 2 jurisdiction to determine the opportunity of any amateur athlete, coach, trainer, manager, 3 administrator, or official who is…”
Moore v. U.S. Ctr. for SafeSport, 685 F. Supp. 3d 490 (E.D. Mich. 2023).
· cites it 6× “” 36 U.S.C. § 220541 (a)(1)(B)). In the late 2000s and early 2010s, numerous reports of sexual abuse by coaches in Olympic sports made national headlines, most notably those of US coaches in swimming, taekwondo, and gymnastics.”
Nothstein v. USA Cycling, No. 5:19-cv-01631 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 19, 2020).
· cites it 3× “The plaintiff argues that the decision to deny the motion to compel the production of the unredacted documents is contrary to law because the names of the alleged victims and reporters are nonprivileged and, thus, discoverable. Pl.’s Objs. at 4–9. USAC argues in response that…”
36 U.S.C. § 220541(f)(4)(C): 1 case
McKenzie v. United States Tennis Ass'n, No. 6:22-cv-00615 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 7, 2023).
“As more fully explained below, the majority of the motion resolves on the applicability and interpretation of a federal statute—36 U.S.C. § 220541(f)(4)(C). See Doc. Nos.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.