About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


12 You Make the Call 1 (2010)

handle is hein.blasports/ansrvds0012 and id is 1 raw text is: Volume 12, Number 1 {Spring/Summer 20101 Alternative Dispute Resolution U.S. Olympic Comm. v. Ruckman, 2010 WL 2179527 (D. N.J. May 28, 2010). The plaintiffs, the USOC and U.S. Rowing, moved to have an arbitration award awarded against the defendants affirmed. In the underlying arbitration award, the defendants argued against the particular manner in which athletes were chosen for the Olympic Games. The panel found in favor of the USOC and U.S. Rowing. Afterwards, only U.S. Rowing moved to have the award confirmed under the Federal Arbitration Act. In response, the defendant filed a motion to have the case removed to federal court, which the court granted. There were two main issues before the court: (1) the plaintiffs challenged the removal to federal court and (2) USOC moved for dismissal because it was an improperly joined party. The court concluded that the case was improperly moved to federal court because there was neither a federal question nor complete diversity with a damage amount in excess of $75,000. The court noted that the Amateur Sports Act specifically states that it does not create a private right of action. Furthermore, the defendants never requested monetary damages, only injunctive relief. The court also granted the USOC's motion to dismiss the claims against it because it was improperly joined as a party. The court reasoned that while the USOC was a party to the underlying arbitration, it was U.S. Rowing that moved to have the arbitration award confirmed. @ Copyright 2010, National Sports Law Institute of Marquette University Law School Page 1