Comments Thread For: Golden Boy's Lawsuit Against Al Haymon Enters Discovery Phase

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Mitchell Kane
    Undisputed Champion
    Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
    • Mar 2008
    • 3205
    • 66
    • 0
    • 10,996

    #151
    From FightOpinion:

    Judge brutally & viciously eviscerates Golden Boy’s antitrust lawsuit against Al Haymon



    In one of the most direct & blunt Motion for Summary Judgment rulings I can ever recall reading, Los Angeles Federal Judge John F. Walter essentially agreed with every point raised by Al Haymon’s legal team as to why the Golden Boy anti-trust lawsuit should be terminated. So much so, in fact, that one came away with a clear impression that even if Golden Boy had produced the evidence they had promised the court, it wouldn’t have mattered because the evidence didn’t meet the legal standards to prove the merits of their causes of action.
    My charitable interpretation of what the judge told Golden Boy:

    -You have unclean hands (specifically matchmakers Eric Gomez & Robert Diaz)

    -You failed to provide credible evidence to back up your claims and relied on hearsay

    -Your attorneys didn’t depose boxers or follow legal rationale such as the Rule of Reason

    -Even if you provided the evidence you said you would, so what? Your legal arguments failed based upon the facts presented to the court

    This Motion for Summary Judgment ruling was a complete and total public repudation of Golden Boy attorney Ricardo Cestero.
    Barriers to Entry

    ...The judge ruled with Haymon and even noted Golden Boy’s new TV deal with ESPN. He stated that Golden Boy failed to properly define the boxing market or show that Al Haymon created barriers for Golden Boy for doing business in the boxing marketplace.
    Haymon boxers and coercion

    The judge ruled against this argument, stating Golden Boy provided no declarations or depositions from any boxers on this matter and that Haymon’s fighters made more money as a result of working with him because fights he signed with other promoters were lucrative.
    Judge Walter turned the tables against Golden Boy and used their own words against them:
    In fact, the evidence suggests that it is Golden Boy, not Defendants, that has refused to deal with the Haymon En****** during the pendency of this lawsuit. Indeed, in May 2015, Robert Diaz (Golden Boy’s matchmaker) received a suggestion from the manager of then Golden Boy-promoted heavyweight, Luis Ortiz, to try to place Mr. Ortiz in a bout that is featured within a PBC show. Mr. Diaz responded, “Are you serious? You do know we have sued Haymon right?”.
    Venue blocking

    ...Judge Walter argued that there are plenty of arenas in Southern California available for booking and that their argument of Haymon locking up only one venue doesn’t satisfy the argument they brought to the court.
    In other words, even if Haymon was guilty of locking up venues it simply wasn’t possible for him to lock up *every* venue and that Golden Boy had plenty of opportunities to conduct business as usual.
    Predatory Pricing

    ...Judge Walter sided with Al Haymon. PBC aired on free television, lost a lot of money, and that there’s no evidence a jury would discover showing that Haymon could ever recover his financial losses to complete the circle of predatory pricing.
    Ali Act Violations

    ...The judge sided with Haymon on the issue of standing, stating that the Ali Act was not intended to compensate promoters for lost profits.
    “In this case, after conducting substantial discovery, Plaintiffs have been unable to present any evidence of harm to competition. Instead, Plaintiffs have merely presented evidence of harm to themselves.”
    State vs. Federal causes of action
    Judge Walter dismissed the Federal causes of action raised by Golden Boy against Al Haymon. He dismissed their state causes of action (Unfair Competition Law) without prejudice, meaning Golden Boy could conceivably file suit against Al Haymon in state court if they wanted to.
    Bottom line
    Oscar De La Hoya’s lawsuit against Al Haymon had the big names and pizzazz to grab everyone’s attention. In reality, it was unlikely the lawsuit would destroy Al Haymon in the first place. And the final result is that discovery process revealed or confirmed pretty much what you thought about both sides heading into the case. Al Haymon legally admitted that he is a manager and our records requests with the various state athletic commissions proved that he was applying for licensure in Nevada.
    The Golden Boy suit was not the lawsuit that was going to destroy Al Haymon. The lawsuit that has had a direct impact on Al Haymon is the Kansas shareholder derivative lawsuit against the hedge fund that backed Al Haymon’s PBC venture. It was filed in April of 2016 and took a few months to make a real impact before everything changed on the PBC front regarding the amount of shows booked. Going after Haymon’s cash was always the most effective legal (python) strategy. Nothing has changed on that front.

    Comment

    • Mitchell Kane
      Undisputed Champion
      Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
      • Mar 2008
      • 3205
      • 66
      • 0
      • 10,996

      #152
      FightOpinion ‏@FightOpinion 2h
      FightOpinion Retweeted Larry Brown
      Oscar's suit against Al Haymon was never a game changer. The real blow to Haymon was/is that Kansas shareholder suit vs. his hedge fund $.

      Comment

      • The Big Dunn
        Undisputed Champion
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • Sep 2009
        • 69579
        • 9,687
        • 8,003
        • 287,568

        #153
        Originally posted by OnePunch
        Here's a little "fact salad" for you to chew on.......


        Fact: The Ali Act prohibits a "manager" from having a financial interest in the promotion of a fighter.

        Fact: Haymon is a licensed "manager" in Nevada, and several other states

        Fact: Haymon has a financial interest in PBC events

        Fact: The licensed "promoters" Haymon hires are paid a flat fee and have no financial interest in the promotion.


        Now if you think those facts are "nuts", then there is no reason to continue the discussion because obviously you have decided to NOT be objective about it......
        I look froward to discussing the recent events involving the lawsuit dismissal with you.

        Will you now admit Haymon is not violating the Ali act?

        Comment

        • The Big Dunn
          Undisputed Champion
          Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
          • Sep 2009
          • 69579
          • 9,687
          • 8,003
          • 287,568

          #154
          Originally posted by Cinci Champ
          its going to be hilarious when they lose this lawsuit
          Nice call Cinci Champ!

          Comment

          • Mitchell Kane
            Undisputed Champion
            Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
            • Mar 2008
            • 3205
            • 66
            • 0
            • 10,996

            #155
            Paul Gift‏ MMAanalytics

            Looks like Golden Boy & Haymon are currently in arbitration over breach of 2014 settlement. Probably GB still going at Haymon. #boxing

            Comment

            • snoopymiller
              Contender
              Silver Champion - 100-500 posts
              • Jun 2007
              • 367
              • 13
              • 0
              • 6,575

              #156
              Originally posted by Mitchell Kane
              Paul Gift‏ MMAanalytics

              Looks like Golden Boy & Haymon are currently in arbitration over breach of 2014 settlement. Probably GB still going at Haymon. #boxing
              Another "L" on deck shortly for GBP.

              Comment

              Working...
              TOP