Mckenzie V. United States Tennis Association Incorporated, Et Al.

Case Background

On March 28, 2022, Kylie McKenzie filed a personal injury lawsuit alleging negligent hiring and failure to prevent sexual misconduct against the United States Tennis Association (USTA) for failing to protect her. The case was heard in the United States District Court, Florida Middle (Orlando). It was assigned to Judge Paul G. Byron and referred to Magistrate Judge Leslie Hoffman Price. [Case number: 6:22cv615]

Cause

Plaintiff Kylie McKenzie filed a Complaint against the United States Tennis Association (USTA) and USTA Player Development. USTA, as the National Governing Body (NGB) for tennis, promoted the sport in the U.S., managed over 700,000 members, and collected membership dues. USTA selected players and coaches for Team USA and controlled USTA Player Development, which focused on training young tennis players.

Duty of Care and Initial Response

In 2010, the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) recommended improved child protection measures, including a ban on romantic relationships between coaches and athletes. USTA resisted these recommendations and, by 2013, implemented the “Safe Play” program. This program required background checks but did not address the issue of romantic relationships.

Plaintiff’s Experience

Plaintiff Kylie, born March 21, 1999, joined USTA at age 12 and trained at its centers in Carson, CA, and Boca Raton, FL. During her training, Kylie experienced troubling behavior from her coaches.

Training and Misconduct

The USTA national coach who recruited Plaintiff took on the role of her full-time coach. He assured her that she could become a tennis star but emphasized that she needed to make significant sacrifices, including spending less time with her family. The coach aimed to control her daily routine and often kept her alone after practice for lengthy personal conversations.

He discouraged her from playing college tennis and completing her schoolwork. He instructed her to delete the boys’ phone numbers and told the boys not to speak with her. When Plaintiff first kissed a boy at age 15, he reprimanded her. Other USTA players commented that this coach seemed “obsessed” and “in love” with her. The Plaintiff overheard two parents at USTA Training Center West discussing how unusual her relationship with the coach appeared.

Eventually, Plaintiff decided to stop training at the center due to the coach’s behavior and resumed her training at home in Arizona. Later, even though she was still relatively young, Defendants urged Plaintiff to train at their National Training Center in Boca Raton, FL, where top female players from the USTA trained.

Tournament in Waco, TX

When Plaintiff was sixteen, she traveled to a tournament in Waco, TX, under the supervision of a USTA coach in his 30s. After her match, this coach took her to dinner and suggested they sit at the bar. He asked if she thought people might assume they were together. During the trip, the coach asked her to wash his dirty laundry with her own. Afterward, he texted her saying, “I have your thong.” Plaintiff apologized for the misunderstanding, but the coach responded that he was joking. She found this incident troubling.

USTA National Campus – Coach Anibal Aranda

In late 2016, Plaintiff suffered a serious shoulder injury and was rehabilitated at home in Arizona. By August 2018, she moved back to Florida at nineteen to train at the Defendants’ newly opened USTA National Campus in Orlando, a state-of-the-art facility with over 100 courts.

At the USTA National Campus, Plaintiff began working with USTA national coach Anibal Aranda, who had been with Defendants for seven years. Coach Aranda expressed enthusiasm about her potential and promised he could help her succeed despite her injury. After a few initial practices, he scheduled sessions on the farthest red clay court at 11:00 am, a time when the facility was less crowded. He began to build her up with constant praise and engaged her in personal conversations, aware of her injury and financial struggles. He assured her that she would be successful if she continued working with him.

Later, Coach Aranda convinced Plaintiff and her parents to let her move from Arizona to the USTA National Training Center in Boca Raton, FL.

Incident and Investigation

In late October 2018, Coach Aranda’s physical contact became more intrusive under the pretense of improving her serving technique. He stood directly behind her, pressing his body against hers and placing his hands on her hips. As Plaintiff practiced, his fingers moved lower and lower towards her groin with each repetition. On one occasion, he knelt in front of her, his face close to her vaginal area while he held her hips.

On November 9, 2018, Coach Aranda sat next to Plaintiff on the bench after practice and asked if she thought she was beautiful. He then questioned her about her body and who she wanted to resemble on the professional tour. When she mentioned a lean player, Coach Aranda made an inappropriate comment about her skirts. Later, while Plaintiff had a towel over her lap, Coach Aranda slid his hand under it and touched her vagina. She pushed him away, but he aggressively grabbed her calves and knees, trying to get her to look at him. He then attempted to hug her, which she tried to avoid. This incident left the Plaintiff extremely upset and shocked.

She reported the misconduct the next day. SafeSport’s investigation confirmed the inappropriate behavior and revealed Aranda’s history of similar actions. Consequently, USTA terminated his employment and barred him from the USTA National Campus.

Damages

As a direct result of the Defendant’s negligence, Plaintiff suffered sexual harassment and assault by Coach Aranda. This led to bodily injuries, significant pain, and suffering. Kylie also experienced disability, disfigurement, and mental anguish. She faced a reduced capacity to enjoy life, incurred expenses for hospitalization, medical, and nursing care, and lost earnings and the ability to earn money. Furthermore, the misconduct aggravated a pre-existing condition. These damages are either permanent or ongoing, and Plaintiff will continue to endure these losses in the future.

She sought judgment against Defendants for various forms of relief. She requested compensatory damages, prejudgment interest, and punitive damages. Additionally, she asked for attorneys’ fees and the costs associated with the action. Finally, Plaintiff sought any other relief the Court might consider fair and appropriate.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Kylie McKenzie
    • Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Robert Allard | Amy Lynn Judkins | Maegen Peek Luka | Mark John Boskovich | Nicholas Donald Seidule | Edmund A. Normand
    • Experts for Plaintiff(s): Dr. Steven Elig | Illiana Tintos
  • Defendant(s): United States Tennis Association Incorporated | USTA Player Development Incorporated
    • Counsel for Defendant(s): Kevin W. Shaughnessy | Erin Michelle Sales | Joyce Ackerbaum Cox | Meagan Leigh Martin | William Weber
    • Experts for Defendant(s): Monica Applewhite, PhD.

Claims

Count I: Negligent Hiring, Supervision, Credentialing, and Retention

Defendants had a duty to carefully hire, supervise, and evaluate employees like Coach Aranda. They should have promptly investigated any concerns about coaches with tendencies toward inappropriate behavior with female athletes. Defendants were responsible for preventing Aranda from interacting privately with Plaintiff and other female athletes due to his history of misconduct. Despite this, they allowed him unrestricted access without adequate supervision. They failed to investigate prior allegations against Aranda before August 2018 and did not protect Plaintiff from harm by their employees.

Count II: Battery

Defendants, through their agents including Coach Aranda, committed battery by inappropriately touching Plaintiff without her consent. This conduct was intentional and offensive.

Count III: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

Defendants and their agents, including Coach Aranda, intentionally inflicted severe emotional distress on Plaintiff through sexual assault and battery. This outrageous conduct caused significant mental suffering.

Count IV: Negligence

Defendants breached their duty of care in several ways: a. Failing to protect Plaintiff from harassment and assault. b. Employing unsuitable coaches. c. Not enforcing policies to prevent inappropriate behavior. d. Neglecting to investigate complaints about misconduct. e. Failing to inform athletes about coaches with misconduct histories. f. Inadequately disciplining coaches, including Coach Aranda. g. Not informing Plaintiff about Aranda’s past behavior. h. Failing to detect inappropriate behavior towards Plaintiff. i. Not controlling or intervening in coaches’ actions. j. Lacking policies to protect female athletes. k. Failing to prevent escalation of inappropriate conduct. l. Lacking criteria for coaching assignments. m. Not ensuring coach accountability. n. Ignoring detrimental behavior. o. Not ensuring compliance with rules and laws. p. Failing to detect unprofessional behavior. q. Negligent in appointing coaches. r. Allowing unsupervised coaching.

Count V: Respondeat Superior

Defendants were liable for Coach Aranda’s actions as he acted within his employment scope. Aranda used his position to assault and batter athletes, including Plaintiff, at USTA facilities.

Count VI: Punitive Damages

Defendants were liable for punitive damages due to Aranda’s intentional sexual misconduct and gross negligence, which contributed to Plaintiff’s damages.

Defense

Defendants denied all allegations, asserting that Aranda was not acting within the scope of his employment when he allegedly committed the sexual misconduct described in the Complaint. Consequently, Defendants argued that they could not be held liable for his intentional torts. They maintained that they had not breached any duty to Plaintiff.

Expert Testimony

Dr. Steven Elig
Dr. Steven Elig testified for the Plaintiff, offering insights on causation and damages. His testimony covered psychiatric diagnoses, prognosis, and the extent of impairment and symptoms. He provided expert opinions based on medical probability and certainty.

Illiana Tintos
Illiana Tintos, a non-retained expert, also testified for the Plaintiff. She focused on the nature and extent of the Plaintiff’s psychological harms and identified the approximate causes of these harms.

Dr. Monica Applewhite
Dr. Monica Applewhite presented testimony for the Defendants based on her expert report. She discussed the standards of care required for protecting adult athletes by a National Governing Body. Additionally, she addressed the standards for preventing and responding to sexual misconduct and harassment in the workplace. Her testimony evaluated the Defendants’ responses to incidents of sexual misconduct, their policies, and her opinions on these matters.

Jury Verdict

On May 06, 2024, the Florida jury determined in the first phase of the verdict that USTA had failed to protect Kylie from sexual misconduct and that their negligence had harmed her. Accordingly, they awarded her $3 million as special damages. In Phase 2 of the verdict, the jury determined that USTA engaged in conduct that warrants punitive damages and awarded Kylie $6 million. Thus, a total of $9 million was awarded against USTA in this sexual misconduct lawsuit.

On May 07, 2024, Judge Paul G. Byron entered a judgment consistent with the verdict.

Post-trial Motions

On June 04, 2024, Defendants filed a Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law under Rule 50(b), arguing that the trial evidence did not provide a legally sufficient basis for the jury’s verdict in favor of Plaintiff. Alternatively, they sought a new trial under Rule 59(a), claiming the award was unsupported by the evidence and that errors in evidentiary rulings and jury instructions had prejudiced them. They also requested remittitur of the punitive damages award under Rule 59(e).

Court Documents:

Available upon request