Tweet
Legendary promoter Don King escaped a champion boxer's contract and conspiracy claims on Tuesday when a Florida federal judge tossed part of a suit alleging he schemed to get the fighter's title stripped.
Former World Boxing Association regular heavyweight champion Mahmoud Charr says King and his company, Don King Productions, violated contracts by blocking him from participating in a $2 million title defense after King realized he would lose money on the bout.
In an order Tuesday, U.S. District Judge William P. Dimitrouleas said King's actions "likely" violated federal labor protections named for former client Muhammad Ali, who frequently sparred with King over pay. Still, the judge said Charr's complaint couldn't support conspiracy claims leveled at King, and one count failed to identify the specific contract that King allegedly violated.
King had argued the whole suit should be tossed because the WBA is a necessary defendant that had not been joined, but Judge Dimitrouleas disagreed.
"There is nothing to indicate that, in the WBA's absence, the court cannot accord complete relief among existing parties," the judge wrote. "No relief, injunctive or otherwise, is being sought against the WBA in this action. Nor are there facts indicating that the WBA claims an interest relating to the subject of plaintiff's claims."
The suit dates to March 2019, when the WBA ordered Charr to defend his title. He signed a promoter agreement with King entitling him to representation for two years — so long as he remained champion — and at least $750,000 per fight.
The suit says King secured the promotional rights to Charr's title-defense match against another fighter he represented, Trevor Bryan, for $2 million, but soon realized he wouldn't profit off the deal and began a campaign to keep Charr out of the ring. The promoter allegedly refused to sign off on a "bout contract" finalizing the fight — or assist Charr, a Syrian resident living in Germany, with obtaining permission to enter the U.S.
Rather than sign standard WBA bout contracts that Charr sent him — papers the boxer needed to support a visa application — King allegedly left Charr with little choice but to sign an agreement that the promoter drew up himself. King also allegedly made false promises to pull strings with the administration of then-President Donald Trump to get Charr admitted despite Trump's ban on travelers from predominantly ****** countries.
Charr was ultimately unable to compete and lost his title. He sued in August, claiming King conspired to tortiously interfere with his bout, violating the promoter agreement and a purse bid agreement.
But the second contract claim fails, Judge Dimitrouleas said, because the complaint refers to a number of signed and unsigned contracts relating to the fight itself, and it is "unclear … what contract plaintiff is attempting to allege that DKP breached." The intra-corporate conspiracy doctrine bars allegations King conspired with his own company, the judge added, dismissing the civil conspiracy claim without prejudice.
Charr's attorney, Patrick English of Dines & English LLC, told Law360 they had expected the latter dismissal pending discovery and were still deciding what to do about the contract claim.
Counsel for King did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Read more at: https://www.law360.com/articles/1444294?copied=1
Former World Boxing Association regular heavyweight champion Mahmoud Charr says King and his company, Don King Productions, violated contracts by blocking him from participating in a $2 million title defense after King realized he would lose money on the bout.
In an order Tuesday, U.S. District Judge William P. Dimitrouleas said King's actions "likely" violated federal labor protections named for former client Muhammad Ali, who frequently sparred with King over pay. Still, the judge said Charr's complaint couldn't support conspiracy claims leveled at King, and one count failed to identify the specific contract that King allegedly violated.
King had argued the whole suit should be tossed because the WBA is a necessary defendant that had not been joined, but Judge Dimitrouleas disagreed.
"There is nothing to indicate that, in the WBA's absence, the court cannot accord complete relief among existing parties," the judge wrote. "No relief, injunctive or otherwise, is being sought against the WBA in this action. Nor are there facts indicating that the WBA claims an interest relating to the subject of plaintiff's claims."
The suit dates to March 2019, when the WBA ordered Charr to defend his title. He signed a promoter agreement with King entitling him to representation for two years — so long as he remained champion — and at least $750,000 per fight.
The suit says King secured the promotional rights to Charr's title-defense match against another fighter he represented, Trevor Bryan, for $2 million, but soon realized he wouldn't profit off the deal and began a campaign to keep Charr out of the ring. The promoter allegedly refused to sign off on a "bout contract" finalizing the fight — or assist Charr, a Syrian resident living in Germany, with obtaining permission to enter the U.S.
Rather than sign standard WBA bout contracts that Charr sent him — papers the boxer needed to support a visa application — King allegedly left Charr with little choice but to sign an agreement that the promoter drew up himself. King also allegedly made false promises to pull strings with the administration of then-President Donald Trump to get Charr admitted despite Trump's ban on travelers from predominantly ****** countries.
Charr was ultimately unable to compete and lost his title. He sued in August, claiming King conspired to tortiously interfere with his bout, violating the promoter agreement and a purse bid agreement.
But the second contract claim fails, Judge Dimitrouleas said, because the complaint refers to a number of signed and unsigned contracts relating to the fight itself, and it is "unclear … what contract plaintiff is attempting to allege that DKP breached." The intra-corporate conspiracy doctrine bars allegations King conspired with his own company, the judge added, dismissing the civil conspiracy claim without prejudice.
Charr's attorney, Patrick English of Dines & English LLC, told Law360 they had expected the latter dismissal pending discovery and were still deciding what to do about the contract claim.
Counsel for King did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Read more at: https://www.law360.com/articles/1444294?copied=1