NASCAR Driver Surrendered His Right to Sue by Signing Agreement

Jun 18, 2010

A federal judge from the Western District of North Carolina has dismissed the claim of a NASCAR driver, who after testing positive for banned substances and being suspended by NASCAR, sued the association and the testing agency for breach of contract and defamation, among other things.
 
The defendants, represented by Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, successfully argued that Jeremy Mayfield agreed to abide by NASCAR’s Substance Abuse Policy, and thus waived his right to bring any claims.
The dispute began on May 1, 2009, when a NASCAR official asked Mayfield to take a random drug test. Inside the testing trailer, Mayfield was instructed on the procedures for providing a urine sample. He claimed that he was told “to select a urine cup from a cluttered non-sterilized table,” which he did.
 
On May 7, 2009, an official called and told Mayfield that his urine sample tested positive for a prohibited substance and asked for Mayfield’s medical records. Mayfield provided his medical records that same day.
 
Mayfield alleged that on May 9, 2009, the results of both tests were forwarded to NASCAR. Later that day, a NASCAR representative informed Mayfield that he was indefinitely suspended from competition as both driver and owner.
 
On May 15, NASCAR held a press conference in which officials “stated to reporters that Mayfield was suspended because he took a ‘performance-enhancing’ or ‘recreational’ drug.’” They further said that the test results were not related to an over-the-counter drug or a prescription medication.
 
Mayfield would ultimately sue for breach of contract, negligence, defamation, unfair and deceptive trade practices, and breach of North Carolina’s Persons with Disabilities Protection Act.
 
The defendants moved to dismiss. In considering that motion, the court focused on the document that Mayfield and other drivers sign, which allows them to compete on the circuit.
 
That agreement “requires that both driver and car owner ‘abide by the NASCAR
Substance Abuse Policy, and car owner covenants that driver and the team’s crew members are additionally tested for substance abuse under the car owner’s or team’s substance abuse policy.’ Under the Policy, competitors must submit to random drug tests. All testing is to ‘be done at a facility or facilities . . . that have been certified … . If a competitor tests positive for a prohibited substance, his NASCAR license will be revoked for an indefinite period.”
 
Furthermore, “NASCAR may publish the results of any test or tests conducted pursuant to this Policy and the circumstances giving rise to such test to such third parties as NASCAR, in its sole discretion, deems reasonable under the circumstances. The Competitor or Official shall have no claim or cause of action of any kind against NASCAR or any director, officer, employee, or agent of NASCAR with respect to such publication.”
 
The court also noted a passage that a participant signs off on, which reads that the Policy “promotes the integrity of NASCAR-sanctioned racing and the safety of NASCAR Competitors, Officials, and spectators. Accordingly, I HEREBY RELEASE, DISCHARGE, COVENANT NOT TO SUE, AND AGREE TO HOLD HARMLESS NASCAR, its officers, employees, directors, agents, and such testing facilities and Medical Review Officers as NASCAR retains or selects in connection with implementation of the Policy, as well as the officers, employees, and agents of each of them, and any other persons or entities against whom I might have a claim, from and/or for claims, damages, losses, or expenses of any kind, whether caused by negligence or otherwise, arising out of the implementation of the Policy, or any act or omission in connection therewith, including and without limitation, the testing of specimens and the publication of the test results and circumstances giving rise to such test or tests to any third party or parties by NASCAR or said testing facilities or said MRO, as well as the officers, employees, and agents of each of them, or any other persons or entities.”
 
This court applied Florida law (NASCAR is based in Florida) in construing the Agreement, the Drivers Application, and the Owners Application, which holds that a party can waive its right to sue for breach of contract, negligence, and intentional torts. See, e.g., Torjagbo v.United States, No. 07-13728, 2008 WL 2736804, (11th Cir. July 15, 2008).
 
“The plaintiffs agreed to release the defendants from all claims arising under a negligence theory or otherwise,” wrote the court. “(They) thereby waived their right to pursue their claims for defamation, unfair and deceptive trade practices, breach of contract, and negligence. The plaintiffs also failed to allege facts to support each of their claims.”
 
In a statement, Helen M. Maher, a partner in Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP’s Armonk office who led the litigation team, said: “NASCAR’s Substance Abuse Policy is one of the toughest policies in professional sports and its enforcement is essential to the safety of everyone who participates in and attends the races. We are proud of the result and the fact that the judicial system recognized the importance of NASCAR’s Substance Abuse Policy.”
 
NASCAR officials were also pleased with the ruling:
 
“The U.S. District Court’s ruling is a powerful acknowledgment and affirmation of NASCAR’s rulebook and its ability to police the sport. NASCAR has been very clear with its competitors as to its policies and what is expected of them. NASCAR’s comprehensive substance abuse policy, which is among the best and toughest in all of sports, serves the safety of our competitors and fans.”
 
Mayfield v. NASCAR, Inc.; W.D.N.C.; 3:09-CV-220-MU; 5/18/10
 


 

Articles in Current Issue