Both Mayweather and Pacquiao Declared Winners in Legal Scrum Over 'Fight of the Century'
A Ninth Circuit panel held that viewers of the 2015 boxing match between Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao had "no cognizable claim" stemming from Pacquiao's failure to disclose a shoulder injury suffered in the run-up to the fight.
November 21, 2019 at 05:39 PM
3 minute read
Boxer Manny Pacquiao's failure to disclose a shoulder injury in the run-up to his 2015 match with Floyd Mayweather Jr. didn't trigger any legal injury to viewers who paid to watch the fight.
That, in short, is what a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit concluded Thursday in upholding a lower court decision tossing a batch of class action lawsuits filed against the boxers, their promotion companies, and Home Box Office Inc., the broadcaster of the match dubbed "The Fight of the Century" prior to the lopsided contest. Mayweather won the fight in a unanimous decision after it went the full 12 rounds.
Circuit Judge Jacqueline Nguyen noted that this was the first Ninth Circuit decision to grapple with "the rights of a spectator disappointed by a sporting event." Nguyen pointed out that "although the match may have lacked the drama worthy of the pre-fight hype, Pacquiao's shoulder condition did not prevent him from going the full twelve rounds, the maximum number permitted for professional boxing contests."
"Plaintiffs therefore essentially got what they paid for—a full-length regulation fight between these two boxing legends," wrote Nguyen, who was joined in the decision by Chief Judge Sidney Thomas and Sixth Circuit Judge Ronald Lee Gilman sitting by designation.
Nguyen noted that, if plaintiffs' theory of harm was taken to its logical extreme, it would require all professional athletes to disclose any injury, no matter how minor, or potentially risk "a slew of lawsuits" from disappointed fans.
"Such a result would fundamentally alter the nature of competitive sports: Opponents would undoubtedly use such information to their strategic advantage, resulting in fewer games and matches won through fair play, and gone would be the days of athletes publicly declaring their strength and readiness for fear of a lawsuit alleging that fans were misled," she wrote.
Plaintiffs, who included classes of ticket holders to the fight at the MGM Grand Garden Arena in Las Vegas, consumers who paid $89.95 to watch at home via pay-per-view, and commercial venues that paid up to $10,000 to air the broadcast, were represented at oral argument in March by Hart Robinovitch of Zimmerman Reed in Scottsdale, Arizona. Robinovitch didn't immediately respond to a message seeking comment Thursday.
Daniel Petrocelli of O'Melveny & Myers, who represented Pacquiao and HBO among others, and Mark Tratos of Greenberg Traurig, who represented Mayweather and his promotional company, didn't immediately respond to messages.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFederal Judge Rejects Teams' Challenge to NASCAR's 'Anticompetitive Terms' in Agreement
'Rampant Piracy': US Record Labels File Copyright Suit Against French Distributor Believe
5 minute readRobert Downey Jr. Says He 'Intends to Sue' All Future Executives Who Use His AI Replica
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250