SEPTEMBER 3-9, 2015
09-3-7833 Davidovich v. Israel Ice Skating Fed’n, Law Div. (Bergen Cnty.) (Wilson, J.S.C.) (16 pp.) Plaintiff, a figure skater who held dual Israeli and American citizenship, was a member of the IISF, an Israeli organization that trained figure skaters to compete in international figure skating competitions as representatives of Israel, from 2012 until 2014. Upon joining the IISF, plaintiff, then a minor, allegedly entered into an agreement or understanding with the IISF’s parent organization agreeing to be bound by its rules and regulations. The IISF was a member of the International Skating Union, the exclusive international sport federation recognized by the Olympic Committee administering figure skating competitions internationally. ISU rules prohibited a skater who belonged to one member, such as the IISF, from departing to compete internationally for a different member without first obtaining a release from the initial member. Nothing in the ISU rules required a member to grant a release to its former skaters. However, a refusal could be addressed by the ISU Council in an administrative appeal. The ISU constitution claimed that the ultimate appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, was final and binding to the exclusion of jurisdiction of any civil court. Plaintiff filed this action after the IISF refused to issue a release for her to skate for the United States Figure Skating Association, another ISU member. The court concluded that there was no legal or equitable basis for the IISF to continue to refuse to release plaintiff from her membership and she had to be released immediately so that she could pursue her opportunities to skate internationally on behalf of the United States. The court found that there was an actual and justiciable controversy that was ripe for declaratory judgment; the court’s jurisdiction had not been waived by plaintiff, in the form of an arbitration agreement or otherwise and the parties’ relationship was not governed by the appellate procedures maintained by the ISU; the equities required that plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment be partially granted; genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether defendant tortiously interfered with plaintiff’s prospective economic interests and plaintiff had to proceed to trial on that issue; and plaintiff’s motion for sanctions had to be denied until final resolution of the remaining legal issues. [Filed Aug. 28, 2015]
