10/11/2021 7:13 PM

21CV40258

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON
8
FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH
9
) Case No.
10 MARY CAIN, )
) COMPLAINT
11 Plaintiff, )
) Personal Injuries – Negligence – Special Relationship –
12 v. ) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress – Fraud –
) Employment Discrimination – Sex Discrimination
13 NIKE USA, INC., an Oregon )
corporation, and NIKE, INC., an ) Filing Fee Based Upon: ORS 21.160(1)(e)
14 Oregon corporation, and ALBERTO )
SALAZAR, a Citizen of Oregon, ) Amount in Controversy: $20,000,000.00
15 )
Defendants. ) Demand for Jury Trial
16 )
) Not Subject to Mandatory Arbitration
17
Plaintiff alleges
18
1.
19
At all times material hereto:
20
a) Defendant Nike USA, Inc., and Nike, Inc. (collectively referred to herein as
21 “NIKE”) were duly organized Oregon for-profit corporations, authorized to
do business and doing business as a retailer of athletic shoes and related
22 products around the world, with a principal place of business located at One
Bowerman Drive, city of Beaverton, county of Washington, state of
23 Oregon;
24 b) Defendant Nike carried on regular and sustained business activity within
Multnomah County by maintaining retail stores located at: i) 638 S.W. Fifth
25 Avenue; ii) 7000 N.E. Airport Way; and iii) 2650 N.E. Martin Luther King,
Jr. Boulevard; each of which is in the city of Portland, county of
26 Multnomah, state of Oregon;
Page 1 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 c) Defendant Alberto Salazar (“SALAZAR”) is a resident of the city of
Portland, county of Multnomah, state of Oregon, and a citizen of the state
2 of Oregon;
3 d) Defendant Nike selected, approved, and retained defendant Salazar in the
position of Head Coach of the Nike Oregon Project, a group of runners that
4 lived in the Portland area and trained at Nike's headquarters campus;
5 e) The Nike Oregon Project was formed in the year 2001, and ceased existence
in the year 2019;
6
f) As Head Coach of the Nike Oregon Project, defendant Salazar was an
7 employee and/or agent of defendant Nike, acting within the course and
scope of his employment and/or agency relationship;
8
g) Defendant Salazar agreed to act on Nike’s behalf and under its control, and
9 with defendant Nike’s agreement and understanding that Salazar would act
on its behalf;
10
h) Plaintiff was a participant in the Nike Oregon Project.
11
2.
12
In the early 2000s, defendants Salazar and Nike hatched a plan to attempt to revive the
13
American position of dominance in the sport of distance running. In doing so, they created the
14
Nike Oregon Project in 2001, an elite training program for distance runners. The Nike Oregon
15
Project website stated that the program endeavored to “improve biomechanics and abilities of
16
current American athletes” using “Salazar [as] the coach [and] Nike technology and resources as
17
a catalyst.” The website also proffered “to provide the fertile training ground to develop the best
18
distance runners in the world and our metric of success is Olympic and World Championship
19
medals.”
20
3.
21
Defendants Nike and Salazar stated their eventual dominance in the sport was achieved
22
through “rigorous training and the utilization of cutting-edge sports science and performance
23
technology.” The promise, explicit and implied, was that runners who joined the Nike Oregon
24
Project would be trained by an elite staff, have unlimited resources at their disposal, and be
25
provided with resources to care for the runner at the highest level possible, physically, mentally,
26
Page 2 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 and emotionally. It became well known that the Nike Oregon Project is where American distance

2 runners would become the best distance runners in the country, and perhaps the world, with the

3 best coaching that money could buy.

4 4.

5 In the Fall of 2012, defendant Salazar solicited Mary Cain (“PLAINTIFF or “CAIN”) to

6 become her coach and recruited her to join the Nike Oregon Project. Cain, who was 16 years old

7 at the time, informally joined the team, and Salazar began acting as her coach.

8 5.

9 On or about November of 2013, Nike offered, and plaintiff accepted, an endorsement

10 contract for plaintiff to become a professional runner as an athlete for Nike on The Nike Oregon

11 Project. Defendant Nike did not offer, and plaintiff did not have the freedom to change coaches

12 or choose a different coach, apart from defendant Salazar, in order to train and run for the Nike

13 Oregon Project. Plaintiff was now 17 years old and a senior in high school. After she graduated,

14 Cain moved from the state of New York to Portland, Oregon, where she principally resided for

15 the duration of her time running for the Nike Oregon Project. During this time, when in Oregon,

16 plaintiff would often stay at defendant Salazar’s home, at his invitation.

17 6.

18 As Head Coach of the Nike Oregon Project, defendant Salazar’s role was to befriend,

19 mentor, counsel, instruct, and train runners including plaintiff, to provide all duties of a running

20 coach, but most importantly to win races for the runners endorsed by and hired by defendant

21 Nike as runners participating in the Nike Oregon Project.

22 7.

23 While performing his duties as Coach, and at least in part for the purpose of furthering the

24 duties required in those roles, Salazar befriended plaintiff and gained the trust and confidence of

25 plaintiff and her family as a trustworthy mentor, manager/supervisor, counselor, coach, and

26 authority figure. As such, Salazar was able to spend substantial periods of time alone with

Page 3 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 plaintiff. As a consequence, plaintiff was conditioned to trust Salazar in a position of authority

2 in related to physical and emotional matters.

3 8.

4 Defendant Nike compensated plaintiff based on her performance, including the number of

5 races she competed in or her appearance at certain events, and gave her bonuses based on her

6 performance. Plaintiff did not compete on behalf of or at the direction of any other company or

7 have any other endorsement. The success of the runners on the Nike Oregon Project was an

8 integral part of Nike’s business model. Nike prohibited plaintiff and other runners on the Nike

9 Oregon Project from being endorsed by other companies, and publicly wearing or using clothing

10 or equipment made by other companies. Plaintiff was economically dependent on Nike for her

11 income.

12 9.

13 Defendant Salazar supervised, directed, and controlled the way plaintiff performed services

14 for Nike. This included setting plaintiff’s daily training schedule—including whether she ran on

15 a track or a treadmill, what days, with whom, and how she trained, how many miles she ran, and

16 the like. Defendant Salazar directed and oversaw all of her medical visits, consultations and

17 treatment. Salazar selected which competitions she would complete in; controlled her diet and

18 sleep schedule and provided the materials and equipment for her to train and compete. Explicitly,

19 Salazar told her to, “trust me and do exactly what I say. I will give you a chance to give your

20 input but after I’ve listened to you, I will tell you what I want you to do and I expect you to do

21 it.”

22 10.

23 Defendant Salazar directed plaintiff’s medical, nutritional and psychological treatment.

24 Salazar made it clear to plaintiff that she should only get medical, nutritional or psychological

25 attention if he deemed it appropriate, and sowed doubt in the ability of medical professionals not

26 specifically provided by him to understand the needs of elite athletes. Salazar touted that he had

Page 4 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 “an eye” for weight and body composition that he relied on even in direct contradiction to

2 objective measures and scientific data. Salazar’s training focused on weight over and above other

3 training metrics. As a consequence, plaintiff’s access to medical care was largely directed and

4 controlled by Salazar.

5 11.

6 While Plaintiff was being coached by defendant Salazar, he consistently made comments to

7 plaintiff about her appearance, her weight, and her body. Salazar told her that she was too fat

8 and that her breasts and bottom were too big. Salazar regularly warned her not to gain too much

9 weight and compared her to other female athletes. If they were too fat, he warned her not to get

10 like that; and if they were optimally shaped, in his opinion, he would tell her to aim for that

11 appearance. Salazar also tightly controlled plaintiff’s food intake on trips abroad and while

12 training in Park City, Utah, leaving plaintiff to steal Clif bars from her teammates and eat them

13 in the bathroom because she was being underfed. As defendant Salazar did this, he stated that he

14 was expert at identifying which female bottoms were than of good runners and which were not.

15 Salazar and other Nike employees often made sexist and objectifying comments about female

16 athletes, focusing on their appearance and weight, while they did not make similar comments to

17 or regarding male athletes.

18 12.

19 Based on Salazar’s constant pressure on plaintiff to lose weight, plaintiff lost eight pounds

20 over the summer of 2014, before moving to Portland. Without consulting any medical

21 professional, Salazar arbitrarily set a goal weight for plaintiff to be 114 pounds. Even as plaintiff

22 continued to rank well at various races and became known as the “fastest girl in America,”

23 defendant Salazar would berate her for her weight being too heavy, even though she was almost

24 always borderline underweight. He would say things like “You look like shit * * * you’ve clearly

25 gained five (5) pounds because you ate bacon and eggs;” and “you’re too heavy;” “it’s clear that

26 your weight is why you’re slow.”

Page 5 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 13.

2 Most often, plaintiff’s weight was approximately 117 pounds, and was almost always

3 borderline underweight. Defendant Salazar would regularly become angry that plaintiff did “not

4 make weight,” in that she did not meet the arbitrary weight he’d set for her. Salazar would

5 rationalize any performance that he perceived as poor to be because of her being overweight,

6 saying things after a race like “that’s because you ate too much yesterday.”

7 14.

8 Several times, Salazar would require Cain to stand on the scale, to have her weight revealed

9 and discussed, always in a negative way, in front of others. This occurred in the Nike Oregon

10 Project room on Nike premises. Salazar also talked about plaintiff’s weight, and the weight of

11 other female athletes openly in front of runners on the men’s team.

12 15.

13 In 2014, plaintiff won the junior world championships in the 3000-meter race in Eugene,

14 Oregon. An American woman had never claimed that title; the achievement was remarkable and

15 celebrated. After her win, Salazar made a point to tell her he thought she looked heavy in that

16 race. He even retold the story in front of others, that in the days leading up to the race he gave

17 her sprint times to run that were very fast, anticipating that she wouldn’t be able to do them

18 because she was “too heavy.” A week after her win at the junior world championships, she was

19 told that, though some of her teammates were going to race in Europe, she wouldn’t do well

20 enough to justify her going to Europe because of her weight – this is right after her success at

21 the junior world championships.

22 16.

23 In April of 2015, Plaintiff once had a good workout in the morning, and in the evening a

24 disappointing one, and Salazar claimed he knew she gained five pounds since that morning, a

25 clear medical impossibility. Salazar was irate on this occasion, flailing his arms, red in the face

26 screaming that plaintiff had gained five pounds in one day. On a regular basis, weight was the

Page 6 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 main focus of plaintiff’s interactions with defendant Salazar and was discussed and prioritized

2 over and above any other performance variable. Salazar recommended birth control, diuretics,

3 laxatives, and fleet enemas in order for plaintiff to control weight and bloating. Between August

4 2014 and June 2015, defendant Salazar talked about plaintiff’s weight every single day.

5 17.

6 As a result of defendant Salazar’s conduct, as described above, plaintiff regularly did not

7 consume enough food to maintain caloric sufficiency for the level of training she was doing. For

8 example, plaintiff would eat salad, fruit and vegetables only, attempting to lose weight. Salazar

9 told her that to lose a pound, she needed to cut 3500 calories. At his encouragement, she would

10 cut calories randomly, without reason and without professional guidance. Salazar would

11 continually tell her what not to eat, but never provided professional services to guide or direct

12 her what to eat, leaving plaintiff with a long list of restrictions but no viable dietary plan.

13 18.

14 Salazar often pushed Cain to train even though she was suffering from debilitating and

15 painful injury and illness. In 2014, she was suffering a painful injury, a stress response in her left

16 shin. Salazar looked at the MRI showing the stress injury, yet he continued to push Cain through

17 the pain until she couldn’t stand it anymore and was forced to close her training season early due

18 to the unrelenting pain. Salazar coached Cain to do three extra workouts a week to, as he said,

19 “catch up with the older girls” and “lose weight.” Salazar coached Cain to do extra workouts,

20 like walking with wrist weights, do core exercises every day, and cross-training, just so that she

21 would stay lean, he said. In 2015, when she was very ill, diagnosed with Hand Foot Mouth

22 disease, he coached her to continue training and would not let her take a break. Finally, when

23 Cain’s parents discovered that Salazar was requiring her to continue training, and that she was

24 incredibly sick, her parents asked Salazar to let her take a break, which he did. Salazar appeared

25 angry that Cain had allowed her parents to intervene regarding her health.

26 ///

Page 7 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 19.

2 On at least one occasion, plaintiff attempted to induce vomiting in order to lose weight and

3 shared this information first with the sports psychologist employed by defendants. Cain then

4 shared the information with Salazar, who did not seem surprised to hear such information.

5 Defendants did nothing in response to this sign of disordered eating.

6 20.

7 On one occasion, the sports psychologist caught Cain attempting self-harm, by cutting

8 herself, enough to draw blood, on her shins, and on another occasion, pricking her fingers. Cain

9 told Salazar, and the sports psychologist, that she was cutting herself. Cain was offering this

10 information reaching out for help. Defendants did nothing. On other occasions, Salazar and the

11 sports psychologist witnessed Cain hit herself violently in the head, as if flogging herself for a

12 bad performance. Still, they did nothing.

13 21.

14 Salazar gained detailed knowledge of plaintiff’s emotional state through the sports

15 psychologist, who shared sometimes intimate and confidential information about Cain’s mental

16 and emotional state freely with Salazar.

17 22.

18 Plaintiff would often show emotion in an outward way, such as crying, and sometimes

19 suffering panic attacks, which sometimes occurred while training, or while traveling on a bus

20 with Salazar and in the presence of teammates. Salazar teased her about being emotional, and

21 did so in front of other people, accusing her of being weak because she could not control her

22 emotions. It was well-known by Salazar and the team generally that plaintiff was struggling

23 emotionally during her time at the Nike Oregon Project.

24 ///

25 ///

26 ///

Page 8 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 23.

2 Defendants Nike and Salazar, and each of them, did not employ any certified nutritionist,

3 athletic trainer, or physician to regularly or systematically track, support, monitor, treat or adjust

4 training schedules according to medically verifiable measurements, testing or assessments. The

5 physical trainer they did employ, David McHenry, did not regularly or systematically track,

6 support, monitor, treat or adjust training schedules for plaintiff according to medically verifiable

7 measurements, testing or assessments.

8 24.

9 At the time that plaintiff signed the contract to run with the Nike Oregon Project, as alleged

10 in ¶4, she and her parents were unaware of the following facts and circumstances concerning

11 defendants Salazar and Nike, and the Nike Oregon Project:

12 a) That defendant Salazar had committed sexual misconduct with another athlete;
13 b) That defendant Salazar had possessed and trafficked testosterone in violation of
anti-doping regulations;
14
c) That defendant Salazar had experimented with athletes on how far he could
15 push the envelope with performance enhancers without getting caught by anti-
doping regulatory bodies;
16
d) That defendant Salazar used female athlete’s weight as the primary
17 performance variable, and commented negatively on female athletes’ bodies,
commenting on their “asses” and “boobs” as being too large; and required
18 runners to weigh themselves publicly and discuss weight publicly as a matter
of course;
19
e) That defendants Nike and Salazar had employed Darren Treasure and held him
20 out as a “sports psychologist,” without Mr. Treasure being licensed in Oregon
as a psychologist, and that Salazar could obtain and use otherwise inaccessible
21 mental health information about the athletes he trained, as alleged in ¶¶19–22
above;
22
f) That defendant Salazar disregarded medical advice and the long-term health of
23 athletes in pushing them back into training after injury or illness, ad that he
overtrained athletes generally without regard to their long-term health and well-
24 being;
///
25
///
26
Page 9 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 g) That defendant Salazar maintained an inappropriate level of control over
1 athletes’ medical treatment, without appropriate training or expertise, in
recommending that athletes use doctors and specialists he had relationships
2 with and suggesting remedies and treatments he desired, rather than those that
were medically appropriate for athletes, including plaintiff.
3
4
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
5 (Special Relationship)
(Against Defendants Nike and Alberto Salazar)
6
25.
7
Plaintiff realleges ¶¶1–24 above as though fully set forth herein.
8
26.
9
Plaintiff, acting through her parents while she was a minor, authorized defendant Nike and
10
its employees and agents, including, but not limited to, defendant Salazar, to exercise
11
independent supervisory responsibility to safeguard her physical and mental well-being while
12
plaintiff was running and training with the Nike Oregon Project.
13
27.
14
Plaintiff was placed in a position of reliance upon defendant Nike and its employees and
15
agents, including defendant Salazar, and had entrusted responsibility and control over her well-
16
being to them, while training with the Nike Oregon Project. Plaintiff was expected to abide by
17
the expectations and rules of defendant Nike, acting independently and through its employees
18
and agents, including defendant Salazar, while training at the Nike Oregon Project.
19
28.
20
Defendants, and each of them, created a special relationship with plaintiff by inviting her to
21
travel and live at defendant Salazar’s residence, and to rely on him as her advisor, above and
22
before her parents. Indeed, Salazar specifically told plaintiff to stop going to her parents for help
23
and guidance, as she was a professional now and other professionals on the team did not need
24
their parents to consult with them. This special relationship created a duty of care on the part of
25
defendants, and each of them, to ensure Cain’s safety, as a minor and young adult participating
26
Page 10 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 in an elite running program.

2 29.

3 Plaintiff’s claims are timely filed, pursuant to ORS 12.010, because plaintiff did not

4 reasonably discover on or before March 8, 2018 the role that defendants’ conduct played in

5 causing the injuries and conditions described in ¶¶32 and 33, below. Cain had always reasonably

6 believed the injuries and conditions described were caused by her own internal failings – that

7 she and only she was to blame. Defendants’ conduct, as alleged below in her Third Claim for

8 Relief (Fraud/False Misrepresentation), below, ¶¶47-57, and including that their reputation was

9 not challenged for the incidents described in ¶24 above until late in 2019, caused plaintiff to not

10 reasonably discover the nature of defendants’ role in her injuries and conditions.

11 COUNT ONE
(Negligence)
12 (Against Defendant Alberto Salazar)
13 30.

14 Plaintiff realleges ¶¶1–29 above as though fully set forth herein.

15 31.

16 Defendant Salazar acted negligently, breached a duty of care owed to plaintiff based on the

17 special relationship, and created a reasonably foreseeable and unreasonably dangerous risk of

18 harm, in one or more of the following ways:

19 (a) In failing to treat everyone fairly regardless of a person’s sex;

20 (b) In failing to recognize the contribution of each individual and his or her right
to freedom from physical or sexual harassment;
21
(c) In failing to refrain from verbal violence;
22
(d) In failing to act in a manner respectful of the dignity of all participants in sport,
23 including plaintiff Mary Cain;
24 (e) In failing to interact with others in a manner that enables all participants in
sport, including plaintiff, to maintain their dignity
25
(f) In failing to treat all participants in sport, including plaintiff, fairly and with
26 respect at all times;
Page 11 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 (g) In failing to provide feedback to athletes, including plaintiff, in a caring
manner;
2
(h) In failing to refrain from demeaning comments about others in sport;
3
(i) In failing to communicate and cooperate with family members (with the
4 athlete’s participation and consent), involving them as appropriate in decisions
pertaining to the athlete’s development;
5
(j) In failing to keep confidential any information about athletes or others gained
6 through coaching activities and believed to be confidential by those persons;
7 (k) In failing to remain “well prepared and current” in the discipline of coaching
and engaging in responsible coaching;
8
(l) In failing to ensure that activities are suitable for the age, experience, ability,
9 psychical and psychological conditions of athletes;
10 (m) In failing to refrain from using training methods or techniques that may harm
athletes;
11
(n) In failing to consider the athlete’s future health and well-being as foremost
12 when making decisions about an injured athletes’ ability to participate;
13 (o) In failing to abstain from sexual harassment which includes engaging in
deliberate or repeated sexually-oriented comments;
14
(p) In failing utilize a physical therapist, athletic trainer, or physician to regularly
15 or systematically track, support, monitor, treat or adjust training schedules
according to medically verifiable measurements, testing or assessments;
16
(q) In failing to refrain from reliance on weight as the primary marker of
17 performance and ability of plaintiff;
18 (r) In choosing a weight goal for plaintiff without scientific or medical input or
support;
19
(s) In failing to refrain from consistent, public, demeaning comments about an
20 athlete’s weight;
21 (t) In encouraging overtraining as a response to a perceived excessive amount of
weight;
22
(u) In failing to ensure that the management of runners’ dietary needs, medical
23 interventions, mental health management, and prescription drug use was
conducted by duly licensed and trained professionals;
24
(v) In failing to adhere to appropriate, safe recovery regiments for injured athletes.
25
///
26
Page 12 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 32.
1
Defendant Salazar’s and Nike’s negligence and fault, as alleged above and herein, was a
2
substantial factor in causing, aggravating and / or exacerbating the following injuries, some of
3
which are permanent:
4
(a) Relative energy deficiency in sports (“RED-S”);
5
(b) Achilles tendinitis of right lower extremity;
6
(c) Adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood;
7
(d) Amenorrhea;
8
(e) Avoidant-restrictive food intake disorder;
9
(f) Difficulty walking;
10
(g) Femoroacetabular impingement of the left hip;
11
(h) Femoroacetabular impingement of the right hip;
12
(i) Fracture of the femoral neck, left;
13
(j) Groin pain, left;
14
(k) Joint pain, hips, bilateral;
15
(l) Joint disorder, hips, bilateral;
16
(m) Lumbar disc herniation;
17
(n) Osteoporosis;
18
(o) Stress fractur of the left tibia;
19
(p) Tear of the left acetabular labrum;
20
(q) Tear of the right acetabular labrum;
21
(r) Vitamin B12 deficiency;
22
(s) Sprain of the right hip.
23
33.
24
As a result of the hip disorders listed above, plaintiff underwent bilateral hip arthroscopy on
25
July 31, 2020.
26
Page 13 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 34.

2 As a result of Defendant Salazar’s and Nike’s negligence and fault as alleged above and

3 herein, plaintiff has suffered severe emotional distress, loss of dignity, pride, and self-esteem,

4 developed an eating disorder, major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety, and post-traumatic

5 stress disorder. Plaintiff further suffered a loss of, self-confidence, grief, and shame all to her

6 non-economic loss not to exceed the sum of $20,000,000.00.

7 35.

8 As a result of Defendant Salazar’s and Nike’s negligence and fault as alleged above and

9 herein, plaintiff has incurred and will incur in the future reasonable and necessary medical

10 expense in amount to be determined before trial.

11 36.

12 Plaintiff Mary Cain is entitled to pre-judgment interest at the legal rate of 9% per annum for

13 her economically verifiable losses from the date of loss to the date of entry of judgment herein.

14 37.

15 Plaintiff reserves the right to amend this Complaint at the time of trial to more completely

16 allege plaintiff Mary Cain’s economic losses and/or to conform to proof offered at trial or obtained

17 through the course of discovery.

18 38.

19 Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial.

20 COUNT TWO
(Negligence)
21 (Against Defendant Nike)
22 39.

23 Plaintiff realleges ¶¶1–38 above as though fully set forth herein.

24 40.

25 Defendant Nike is vicariously liable for the acts and omissions of its employee and/or agent,

26 defendant Salazar, in one or more of the particulars set for in ¶30 above.

Page 14 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 41.

2 Defendant Nike is independently negligently, and breached a duty of care owed to plaintiff

3 Mary Cain based on the special relationship, and created a reasonably foreseeable and

4 unreasonably dangerous risk of harm, in one or more of the following additional ways:

5 (a) In failing to investigate or otherwise reasonably and adequately respond to

warning signs indicating Nike’s employee and/or agent, defendant Salazar,
6 exhibited emotionally abusive behavior toward plaintiff and other female
runners as alleged above;
7
(b) In failing to properly supervise or restrict Salazar’s defendant employment
8 and/or agency relationship, upon learning of warning signs indicating his
violation of the ethical standards set by USA Track and Field, and his other
9 grooming and emotionally abusive behavior as alleged above;
10 (c) In failing to warn members of and participants in the Nike Oregon Project,
such as plaintiff Mary Cain, and her family, of the danger of Salazar’s
11 emotional and physically abusive behavior with female athletes;
12 (d) In failing to adequately train employees, volunteers, and or representatives
of defendant Nike to adequately and appropriately respond to breaches of
13 the ethical standards set by USA Track and Field, and warning signs
indicating grooming and emotionally abusive behavior with female athletes;
14
(e) In failing to implement adequate policies that would have prevented Salazar
15 from isolating, grooming and emotionally abusing Cain on numerous
occasions;
16
(f) In failing to promulgate guidance, rules, enforcement or any other
17 accountability measures to coaches regarding professional standards in
discussing athlete’s weight, the female triad, over-training, nutrition and
18 dietary science, recovery after injury/illness, or responding to emotional
distress for athletes.
19
20 42.

21 In its conduct toward plaintiff Cain, defendant Nike acted with malice or a reckless and

22 outrageous indifference to a highly unreasonable risk of harm and with a conscious indifference

23 to the health, safety, and welfare of Plaintiff. Plaintiff hereby gives notice to defendant of her

24 intent to move to add punitive damages against defendant at any time after the filing of this

25 complaint.

26 ///

Page 15 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 43.

2 As a result of the negligence of defendant Nike, in one or more of the particulars set forth

3 above, plaintiff Mary Cain suffered injuries, underwent surgeries, and is entitled to

4 compensatory damages on Count Two of the First Claim for Relief as previously alleged in

5 ¶¶32 through 36 of Count One.

6 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)
7 (Against Defendant Alberto Salazar)
8 44.

9 Plaintiff realleges ¶¶1–43 above as though fully set forth herein.

10 45.

11 Defendant Salazar, as described above, acted with knowledge that severe emotional distress

12 was certain or substantially certain to result from his conduct. Defendant Salazar’s conduct

13 caused plaintiff severe emotional distress. Defendant Salazar’s actions were an extraordinary

14 transgression of the bounds of socially tolerable behavior.

15 46.

16 As a result of the negligence of defendant Salazar’s intentional infliction of emotional

17 distress upon plaintiff, together with Salazar’s breach of authority, trust, and position as trusted

18 authority figure to plaintiff, Cain suffered injuries, underwent surgeries, and is entitled to

19 compensatory damages on her Second Claim for Relief as previously alleged in ¶¶32 through

20 36 of Count One of her First Claim for Relief.

21 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Against Defendants Nike and Alberto Salazar)
22 (Fraud / False Representation)
23 47.

24 Plaintiff realleges ¶¶1–46 above as though fully set forth herein.

25 48.

26 At all times relevant to the acts in this complaint, defendants Salazar and Nike invited and

Page 16 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 encouraged plaintiff to train with the Nike Oregon Project, all while representing that defendant

2 Salazar and his program would be safe and beneficial, physically and emotionally. Plaintiff and

3 her parents reasonably relied upon this false representation.

4 49.

5 Defendants Nike and Salazar knew, or, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have

6 known, that females under defendant Salazar’s direction and control were at risk of sexual abuse,

7 harassment, and emotional abuse, as alleged in ¶24 above. Despite this knowledge, Defendants

8 Salazar and Nike misrepresented, failed to disclose, and/or actively concealed the danger of

9 sexual abuse, harassment, and emotional abuse to plaintiff and her parents as alleged in ¶24

10 above, which were material matters.

11 50.

12 Defendants Nike and Salazar’s representations were false and misleading because:

13 (a) Defendants Nike and Salazar had a duty to disclose known threats to the
health and safety of the runners involved with the Nike Oregon Project;
14
(b) Defendant Nike and Salazar’s invitation to plaintiff to join the Nike Oregon
15 Project required defendants Nike and Salazar, and each of them, to disclose
all matters material to entering into the transaction, and knowledge of the
16 danger that plaintiff would be sexually abused, harassed, and emotionally
abused, while a participant in the Nike Oregon Project would have been
17 material to plaintiff’s decision to join the Nike Oregon Project;
18 (c) Defendants Nike and Salazar, and each of them, actively concealed the
danger of sexual abuse, harassment, and emotional abuse, that defendant
19 Salazar posed as her coach.
20 51.

21 Defendants Nike and Salazar’s knowledge of and representations regarding the danger of

22 sexual abuse, harassment, and emotional abuse and injury at the Nike Oregon Project is material

23 because, if plaintiff and her parents knew or had been given warning of the substantial risk of

24 abuse and danger within the program, they would not have entered into or continued to be in a

25 coaching relationship with defendant Salazar or running as a participant in the Nike Oregon

26 Project.

Page 17 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 52.

2 Defendants Nike and Salazar knew, or, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have

3 known, that that the conduct and representations regarding the reputability, professionalism, and

4 safety of the Nike Oregon Project, as alleged above, were false, misleading, unfounded, and/or

5 made with reckless disregard for the truth. Defendants Nike and Salazar knew that the conduct

6 and representations created a false impression that obscured, covered up, and/or removed an

7 opportunity that might have led plaintiff and/or her parents to discover the types of conduct

8 described above in ¶24.

9 53.

10 Defendants Nike and Salazar’s conduct and representations were made with the intent of

11 inducing plaintiff, her parents, and the community at large to rely on such representations and

12 thereby continue to trust and allow defendant Salazar to be plaintiff’s coach.

13 54.

14 Plaintiff and her parents relied on Defendant Salazar and Nike’s representations in allowing

15 plaintiff to engage in a trust relationship with Defendant Salazar, and the Nike Oregon Project,

16 and its other employees and agents. Plaintiff and her parents reasonably relied on Defendant

17 Salazar and Nike’s representations and conduct, and reasonably believed that Salazar, the Nike

18 Oregon Project, and its staff did not pose a known danger to plaintiff, who was a minor when

19 she entered their care.

20 55.

21 The reliance of plaintiff and her parents was justified because they did not know, and could

22 not have known, of the danger of sexual abuse, harassment, and emotional abuse, and defendants

23 Nike and Salazar’s knowledge, or constructive knowledge, of such danger. Plaintiff and her

24 parents relied on defendants’ representations to their detriment in participating, and allowing

25 plaintiff to participate, in the running program and plaintiff was harmed as a result of this

26 reliance.

Page 18 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 56.

2 As a result of the fraud of defendants Nike and Salazar, and each of them, as described

3 above, plaintiff suffered injuries, underwent surgeries, and is entitled to compensatory damages

4 on her Third Claim for Relief as previously alleged in ¶¶32 through 36 of Count One of her

5 First Claim for Relief.

6 57.

7 In committing the aforementioned fraud, defendants Nike and Salazar, and each of them,

8 acted with malice or a reckless and outrageous indifference to a highly unreasonable risk of harm

9 and with a conscious indifference to the health, safety, and welfare of female runners, including

10 plaintiff. Plaintiff hereby gives notice to defendant of her intent to move to add punitive damages

11 against defendant at any time after the filing of this complaint.

12 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Employment Discrimination—
13 Sex Discrimination—ORS 659A.030(1)(b) et. seq.)
(Against Defendant Nike)
14
COUNT ONE
15 (Hostile Work Environment)
16 58.

17 Plaintiff realleges ¶¶1–57 above as though fully set forth herein.

18 59.

19 Defendant Nike’s behavior as alleged above violated ORS 659A.030 because defendant

20 Nike allowed pervasive workplace harassment based on gender, which had the purpose or effect

21 of unreasonably interfering with plaintiff Mary Cain’s work performance or created an

22 intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment.

23 60.

24 Defendant Nike’s actions caused plaintiff to suffer economic damages for lost wages, out-

25 of-pocket medical costs and accrued interest, in an amount to be determined at trial. Defendant

26 Nike’s actions have also caused plaintiff emotional distress and suffering in an amount to be

Page 19 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 determined at trial.

2 61.

3 Pursuant to ORS 20.107 and ORS 659A.885, plaintiff is entitled to recover actual damages,

4 punitive damages, reasonable attorney fees, and costs from defendant Nike.

5 COUNT TWO
(Disparate Treatment)
6
62.
7
Plaintiff realleges ¶¶1–61 above as though fully set forth herein.
8
63.
9
Defendant Nike’s behavior as alleged above violated ORS 659A.030. Defendant Nike
10
discriminated against plaintiff in the terms and conditions of her employment by treating her
11
differently than her male counterparts.
12
64.
13
Defendant Nike’s actions caused plaintiff to suffer economic damages for lost wages, out-
14
of-pocket medical costs and accrued interest, in an amount to be determined at trial. Defendant
15
Nike’s actions have also caused plaintiff emotional distress and suffering in an amount to be
16
determined at trial.
17
65.
18
Pursuant to ORS 20.107 and ORS 659A.885, plaintiff is entitled to recover actual damages,
19
punitive damages, reasonable attorney fees, and costs from defendant Nike.
20
///
21
///
22
///
23
///
24
///
25
///
26
Page 20 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770
 1 WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for judgment against defendants Nike and Salazar, and each

2 of them for the sum of $20,000,000.00, for her reasonable attorney’s fees, for her costs and

3 disbursements incurred herein, and for such other relief as the court deems just and proper.

4
5 DATED this 11th day of October, 2021.

6
7
/s/ Kristen McCall
8 Kristen McCall, OSB #061380
Megan Johnson, OSB #012819
9 PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP
10 of Attorneys for Plaintiff
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Page 21 – COMPLAINT

PICKETT DUMMIGAN MCCALL LLP

Centennial Block, Fourth Floor
210 S.W. Morrison Street
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 223-7770