Linda French, the former president of the U.S. Center for SafeSport, was suspended for five years with a two-year probationary period following an investigation into three specific violations: failing to report allegations of sexual abuse against coaches, retaliating against an employee who reported abuse, and neglecting to redact private information when complying with subpoenas. Under the SafeSport Code, French was required to challenge this suspension through arbitration rather than direct court litigation. The arbitrator upheld the suspension after reviewing the Center's investigative report and French's testimony. The district court subsequently confirmed the arbitration award, and French appealed to the Tenth Circuit, arguing that the arbitrator committed misconduct by relying on the report and that the hearing was fundamentally unfair.
The Tenth Circuit reviewed the district court's confirmation of the arbitration award de novo for legal questions and applied a clear-error standard to factual findings. The court emphasized that it does not consider the merits of the arbitrator's decision, including asserted errors in determining witness credibility or the weight given to testimony. Instead, the court examined only whether the arbitrator committed prejudicial misconduct or failed to provide a fundamentally fair hearing. A fundamentally fair hearing requires notice, an opportunity to be heard, and the absence of bias. French argued that the arbitrator improperly relied on the Center's investigative report, claiming it constituted inadmissible hearsay. The court rejected this, noting that the SafeSport Code explicitly required the arbitrator to give 'appropriate weight' to the report and permitted the consideration of hearsay. Furthermore, the court noted that French's own testimony was not recorded or transcribed, making it impossible to compare her statements with the report. Even if it were possible, the court could not disturb the arbitrator's decision to rely on the report over French's testimony. Regarding the burden of proof, the court found that the arbitrator correctly applied the 'preponderance of the evidence' standard and did not shift the burden to French. Finally, the court addressed French's claim that she was denied a fair hearing because she could not cross-examine a former employee, Mr. Alistair Casey, whose statements appeared in the report. The district court had reasoned that French had declined to subpoena Casey, believing he would testify for the Center. The Tenth Circuit agreed that this reasoning was not self-defeating and that the district court did not err in observing that French failed to offer Casey's testimony, which did not render the arbitration fundamentally unfair.
The suspension of Linda French remains in effect, and the U.S. Center for SafeSport's authority to enforce its rules through arbitration is reinforced. The decision clarifies that arbitration panels under the SafeSport Code have broad discretion to consider investigative reports and hearsay evidence as long as the governing rules permit it. It also establishes that a party cannot claim a fundamental unfairness based on the inability to cross-examine a witness if they failed to subpoena that witness during the arbitration proceedings. The case is remanded with instructions to confirm the arbitration award, leaving no unresolved doctrinal questions regarding the scope of review for SafeSport arbitration awards.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download