Tweet
You and Dibella fall under the same illusion where you want to pick and choose what part of the Ali Act is important and ignore the rest. The Ali Act was to protect fighters from conflict of interest and prevents anyone from acting as a promoter and manager. Your argument that right now we can't see that the fighters are being exploited so lets ignore that Haymon is clearly acting as both Promoter and Manager. And just because you think they aren't being exploited now doesn't mean they potentially won't be down the line. It's like arguing with an officer who pulled you over for drinking and saying I know I was drunk driving but I didn't hit nobody or hurt anyone and that is what the spirit of the law is so don't arrest me. No you go to jail because the potential of something bad happening and because the law is you can't drink and drive. The law is you can't be manager and promoter because there is risk of conflict of interest. Honest question do you think Haymon is not handling the responsibilities of both a promoter and manager?
-
-
I didn't just post links, I posted dates.
And I did so for a specific reason, based on the link Hougigo put up yesterday on a breakdown of this latest development...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Boxing/comm...trust_lawsuit/First, are GBP's claims subject to arbitration? Haymon says yes. He says these are the same underlying facts and claims that were supposed to be settled in December or that they arise from those claims/settlement. GBP's lawyers will say that this lawsuit is based solely on events and claims that arose AFTER December 19, 2014 so they were not subject to the settlement or the settlement agreement. This is why GBP's complaint says it is limited to events that happened beginning on January 1, 2015.
Haymon's Motion to Stay says that Jan. 1 is an arbitrary date and has only been chosen to avoid the arbitration agreement. They cite a decision by the federal court in the Southern District of New York to support their proposition that a plaintiff cannot "plead around" an arbitration provision by claiming damages that happened after a contract ended but were based on predicate acts before it ended. The GBP case is very different from the one cited - in that case, the arbitration provision was contained in a contract; there hadn't been prior litigation. The SDNY court basically decided that the arbitration clause survives the expiration of a contract, which is nothing new.
Generally speaking, a release of liability (as in a settlement agreement) does not preclude new claims for conduct that is similar and occurs after the release. For example, if I sue my neighbor for trespassing on my property and we reach a settlement releasing each other from liability, that settlement does not preclude me from suing again if he trespasses again after the settlement. Whether it is subject to an arbitration provision in the settlement agreement is a different issue. I'm not aware of any case law that dealt with this issue, but I didn't look for any. I'll be interested to read GBP's argument against the motion. I'm not sure which way this one goes. My intuition is that these are new claims that are not subject to arbitration but I could easily see a judge going the other way.Comment
-
Be honest
I would love to see some of you people admit that you don't care about the Ali Act or the welfare of the fighters and that you only care about seeing Al Haymon take a loss because you think by proxy Mayweather would be seen to have taken a loss also. Truth of the matter is that no matter what happens with this case Floyd Mayweather is The Best Ever and Top Rank, De La Hoya and Manny Pacquiao all can cry a river tears but nothing will change that. They can sue Al Haymon out of boxing but Mayweather will still be remembered as The Best Ever. Don't it hurt so bad? And how pathetic is it to file a lawsuit when you've been outsmarted by someone you thought was your subordinate. Lol. Top Rank and Golden Boy = Sourg****s and Sore losers.Comment
-
Yeah they definitely want to make it seem that way to avoid out of court arbitration. Al Haymon seems to be a step ahead of them and it looks like they're going to need a corrupt judge to help them out of the hole they are in with this thin civil complaint that the defendant seems to have already seen coming. Al Haymon seems to be the smartest person in the room and the other guys who have rested on their laurels for years seem to think that they can merge brains to figure out a way to beat him. The smart money would be on Haymon because he just seems to be a silky smooth operator that none of his adversaries can match move for move.Comment
-
Arum thank you for the fights you gave us over the years but hes a dinosaur and his ways are becoming extinct.
Oscar i like as a foghter and seems loke a good guy but hes not a leader or a smart business man. He was just the face that got it going. Weak minded man who can't control his party.
Ali act is to protect the fighters yet the only ones complaining are the promoters. Fighters are happy
Promoters should be bidding to promote PBC fights instead of crying. Join the times or get left behindComment
-
2012 fvuk Al Haymon 2013 Thank Al Haymon 2014 **** Al Haymon 2015 Thank Al Haymon 2016 ????Comment
Comment