• 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

Zuffa “Renews” its Motion to Seal in Mark Hunt case

August 12, 2018 by Jason Cruz Leave a Comment

Zuffa has “Renewed” its Motion to Seal Exhibits in its Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Supplemental Complaint.  The Court originally denied Zuffa’s Motion to Seal but it now requests the Court once again.

Similar to a Motion for Reconsideration except Zuffa styles the Motion as a “Renewed” Motion.  In most instances, filing a Motion for Reconsideration requires new evidence not considered by the Court to prevail.   A “Renewed” Motion appears to be the same thing.

According to the Motion, it requests the Court to have the documents to remain sealed until the Court determines the results of it.  Originally, the Court was to release the documents on August 6.  Based upon a Pacer search, it appears that the Court is honoring this request.

The Court originally denied Zuffa’s Motion to Seal which included, among other things,  Hunt’s Bout Agreement for his fight with Derrick Lewis.  They also request to seal a Promotional and Ancillary Rights Agreement and a Letter of Agreement between Zuffa and Hunt from August 8, 2014.  According to Zuffa, the agreements are predecessors to the 2016 Promotional Agreement.  Additionally, there are “three Bout Agreements for different events that took place pursuant to the terms of the parties’ 2016 Promotional Agreement.”  Zuffa claims that these are “sensitive commercial information of the parties, the disclosure of which would cause the parties harm and jeopardize their competitive standing in the professional MMA industry.”

Renewed Motion to Seal by JASONCRUZ206 on Scribd

Payout Perspective:

Remember when Demi Moore’s character in “A Few Good Men” ‘strenuously objected’ after the Judge’s objection was overruled.  This situation is the same thing.  There is no real reason that a Court would rethink a previous ruling unless something arose post-ruling.  But, that does not appear to be the case here.  If the Court were to rethink its ruling, one might expect an appeal from Hunt’s attorneys.  This will be a ruling that the plaintiffs’ attorneys in the Zuffa Antitrust Case will be looking at with interest as well as the lawyers in Leslie Smith’s NLRB case.  The reveal of contractual information as to how MMA fighters are paid is a secretive process and unlike wage scales in other sports, payouts in the UFC are held close to the vest.  MMA Payout will keep you posted.

Filed Under: 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

IBF seeks to stay discovery in Opetaia lawsuit

TKO announce Q3 earnings

UFC 333 bonuses

FBI seeking no-bid contract with the UFC

Court denies Top Rank’s Motion to Dismiss in Keane case

Opetaia fires back at IBF in opposition to MTD

Archives

MMA Payout Follow

MMAPayout

Houston may be losing but those Oilers colors are sweet

In an interview with Lara Trump, the #UFC CEO thinks that he will be investigated because of his ties to the president....Maybe also because his company received a "no bid" contract with the FBI at about the same time they threw an event on the White House lawn.

Sabs doing this with a little buzz, right?

NY 🗽 @ddubxdo

Sabrina really in her tik tok era 😂😂

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

Sean Duffy looks like a very dishonest guy to me.

I don’t believe a damn thing he is saying or the Homeland Security guy.

Both appear to be clueless and lying.

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

Washington's game at Michigan State will now kickoff at 2:30 p.m. PT/5:30 p.m. ET. Was originally scheduled for 1:15 PT/4:15 ET. Still on BTN.

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