Supreme Court Allows Lawsuit Against Softball Organizations to Move Forward

LOS ANGELES, June 29, 2016 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The nation’s largest youth softball organizations have come under intense scrutiny following the child molestation conviction of youth softball coach Jose Lopez. On June 22, 2016, the California Supreme Court allowed a lawsuit over the adequacy of background screening processes by defendants Amateur Softball Association of America, Inc., USA Softball, and ASA of Southern California to proceed to trial. 

“These large softball organizations made a commitment to players and their parents that comprehensive background checks would be performed.  If a complete and proper background check had been done, we believe Jose Lopez would not have passed that and he would not have had the chance to prey on children,” revealed attorney Jason Fowler.  

“As part of this process, these groups claimed they performed adequate background checks before results went before a review committee,” explained Fowler, who represents a softball player molested.

“The molestation of a teenage softball player by Jose Lopez exposed the inadequacies of this process.  Discovery in this case showed the defendants spent only a fraction of the money charged for a ‘background check’ of Lopez to search his criminal history.  Strangely, none of the defendants can account for what happened to the remainder of the money—except that it was not spent investigating Lopez’s background,” Fowler disclosed.

“The facts surrounding the claimed vetting process of the defendants led a judge to allow the case to proceed to trial. The defendants then sought to have the California Court of Appeal and the California Supreme Court review and dismiss the case.  After careful consideration, the Court of Appeal and the California Supreme Court allowed the case to proceed to trial,” added another attorney representing Jane Doe, Sean Lowe.  

“Evidence produced so far shows these large softball organizations’ ‘screening’ program appears to be more of a profit center than a tool to protect children.  In this particular case, these organizations only used a portion of the amount charged for the background check to search Lopez’s criminal background.  Although they were provided Jose Lopez’s name, address, and driver’s license, they not only apparently searched using the wrong name, they failed to search using the driver’s license number Lopez provided.  In addition, they did not obtain other important identifying information, such as a social security number, to corroborate the information he submitted.  In short, a prospective coach could simply provide a false name and address and defeat defendants’ background efforts. This should outrage every parent who entrusts their children to these organizations,” Fowler stated.

The lawsuit seeks to hold these softball organizations accountable to the young girls in their programs.  “It is indisputable these young girls and their parents rely on the promises of the defendants that all coaches were properly screened and vetted before being allowed to coach,” according to Lowe.

“What is so troubling is that under these organizations’ own guidelines, they admit Lopez should have never coached Jane Doe.  Yet he did because parents relied upon their background checks, which failed to identify a violent felony conviction or a recent driving under the influence arrest, among others. Lopez was approved to coach and ultimately prey upon young softball players because these organizations chose to screen Lopez by obtaining background checks that were neither comprehensive nor nationwide—indeed, these organizations appear to have no idea what databases were searched,” Lowe explained.

“Tragically, this led to the grooming and molestation of Jane Doe by an older man introduced to her by these organizations. The decisions by the California Court of Appeal and California Supreme Court ensure that those responsible for failing to have an adequate background screening process, after promising parents and players otherwise, will have to answer in court for their actions,” concluded Fowler.

A copy of the complaint can be found here.

About The R. Rex Parris Law Firm
For over 30 years, R. Rex Parris has devoted his practice to protecting the rights of injured people and aggrieved workers.  Rex and his dedicated team provide thorough, high-quality representation with integrity and compassion.  These lawyers fight aggressively against corporate defense attorneys and insurance companies to ensure their clients get the compensation they deserve. For more information, visit rrexparris.com.

Media Contacts: 
Dante Hickles (661) 949-2595 or dhickles@rrexparris.com

Legal Disclaimer:

EIN Presswire provides this news content "as is" without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.