• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

MMA Payout

The Business of Combat Sports

  • Home
  • MMA
    • UFC
    • Bellator
    • One
    • PFL
  • Boxing
  • Legal
  • Ratings
  • Payouts
  • Attendance
  • Gate

Court allows discovery to continue in part in Mark Hunt lawsuit

December 6, 2017 by Jason Cruz Leave a Comment

The Court in the Mark Hunt lawsuit has ordered that discover to continue with respect to all claims except for his RICO claims in his First Amended Complaint until the determination of the Motion to Dismiss filed by Zuffa/Dana White and Brock Lesnar.

The 3-page ruling indicated that discovery (requests for documents and answering of questions) related to Hunt’s RICO claims against the UFC and White.  However, the other claims including breach of contract and battery (for Brock Lesnar) may proceed forward.

Order on Motion to Stay Discovery in part in Hunt case by JASONCRUZ206 on Scribd

The Court notes the changes made from the original Complaint from the First Amended Complaint including changes in the breach of contract claim and the battery claim.  According to the case law cited by the Court, it may stay discovery from a “preliminary peek,” initially a cursory scan of the Motion to Dismiss to determine whether it might win on the merits and dismiss the need for discovery.

The Court was not convinced from its “preliminary peek” at the motion to dismiss that it will certainly be granted for all claims.

Payout Perspective:

If you think the peek is awkward because it provides foresight into a potential outcome of the actual motion, you are not alone.  However, this is the legal authority that is followed.  A minor win for Hunt as this might precipitate a settlement between the parties so that the UFC will not have to spend money on discovery.  Yet, the Court may decide the Motion to Dismiss at any point.  One might suspect that since the Order was issued for the stay in December for a motion to stay that took place in July, it may take more time for the Court to decide the Motion to Dismiss.

Filed Under: Featured, Hunt v. Zuffa, legal, UFC

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Featured

Muhammad Ali American Boxing Revival Act of 2026 introduced into Senate with minor changes

Plaintiffs file Answering Brief in Cirkunov Antitrust Appeal

Jai Opetaia files a lawsuit against IBF

Parties in Mayweather-CSI Entertainment lawsuit provide joint letter to court

Plaintiffs highlight outstanding discovery in Johnson antitrust case

UFC 329 Payout Perspective

Archives

MMA Payout Follow

MMAPayout
Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

WWE merger lawsuit settlement details disclosed in 10-Q:

"WWE's portion of the overall settlement amount is $105.0 million, which is expected to be funded by probable insurance recoveries of $75M, resulting in an expected loss of $30M"

TKO beats analyst expectations with busy Q2 period

So you are saying its a 2-for-1

boosie badazz pardon approval team @scrohto

Poop has been traded for INF prospect Pee

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

TKO Group Holdings released their Q2 results. UFC revenue up $120 million compared to Q2 last year. https://investor.tkogrp.com/news/news-details/2026/TKO-Reports-Second-Quarter-2026-Results/default.aspx

#Mayweather argues that CSI has not established that "alleged difficulty collecting a possible unsecured contract judgment is a legally cognizable basis for the prelim injunction it seeks."

Load More

Copyright © 2026 · MMA Payout: The Business of Combat Sports