From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...
Lindland v. United States Wrestling Association
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
227 F.3d 1000 (2000)
Matt Lindland (plaintiff) and Keith Sieracki both believed they were entitled to be the U.S. entrant in the 76-kilogram weight class of wrestling at the Olympic Games. The two met twice in matches that determined the Olympic spot. Sieracki won the first match. Lindland protested the results of that match. USA Wrestling (defendant) rejected Lindland’s protest. Lindland then sought arbitration, as he was entitled to do under the Stevens Act. Arbitrator Burns ordered a rematch, which Lindland won. Lindland sought confirmation of Burns’s decision in federal court. The federal court upheld Burns’s decision and the court stated that Lindland was entitled to be USA Wrestling’s nominee to the Olympics. Sieracki initiated another arbitration hearing; that arbitrator, Arbitrator Campbell, directed USA Wrestling to make Sieracki its nominee on the basis of his victory in the first match. USA Wrestling was unwilling to accept the outcome of the second match, and chose Sieracki as its Olympic representative, citing Campbell’s decision. After a writ of mandamus from the federal court requiring USA Wrestling to comply with Burns’s decision, USA Wrestling finally submitted Lindland’s name to the United States Olympic Committee (USOC). The USOC, however, refused to accept Lindland as a member of the team. Lindland then returned to federal court, asking the court to again affirm the Burns ruling and compel the USOC to send him to the Olympics. Sieracki argued that because Lindland participated in the hearing with Campbell, Lindland was bound by that decision. The trial court agreed with Lindland. The case was then appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Easterbrook, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 602,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 602,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.