MMA Fighting reports that the Attorney General of Nevada stated its position to Nick Diaz’s claim that his suspension by the Nevada State Athletic Commission violated state administrative laws and Diaz’s due process.
In a letter which preceded Diaz’s lawsuit, the NSAC framed the suspension as “temporary” not a “summary” suspension as claimed by Diaz’s attorneys.
The Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto argues that Diaz’s lawsuit is misguided as the legal team “misunderstood” the suspension. In a letter to Diaz’s attorney, the AG explained the NSAC’s actions.
Via MMA Fighting:
“No Notice of Summary Suspension was ever served on your client,” Masto wrote. “In this matter, Mr. Diaz was properly served with a ‘Notice of Hearing on Temporary Suspension’ and he failed to appear at the hearing. The Commission temporarily suspended Mr. Diaz’s license at the hearing. Neither Mr. Diaz nor you objected in any manner to the temporary suspension.”
Under a “Summary” Suspension, the Nevada rules state that a hearing on the merits must occur within 45 days after the suspension. However, Nevada contends that the suspension was “Temporary” which does not come under the 45 day rule. A hearing on the temporary suspension was not attended by Diaz or his attorney. The Nevada AG also argues that Diaz’s failure to produce his medical marijuana card caused the delay in part. Nevada claims it will proceed with a hearing on the suspension although no date has been set. Meanwhile, the injunction hearing against the Diaz suspension will occur on May 14th.
Payout Perspective:
This post should clarify (h/t to Jonathan Tweedale) a previous tweet in which I stated that Nevada was responding to the lawsuit when in fact it was the lawsuit was the response to the letter sent by Nevada. One thing is correct from the tweet, in law, you have to read carefully. The timeline of events is important here considering Nevada’s letter to Diaz’s attorney regarding the status of suspension and the failure for Diaz to object to the suspension. Still, the Court will determine the status of the injunction on May 14th. This may clarify the status of the suspension and hopefully the commission will set a hearing date for it to hear the merits of the case.
Wow, tens of thousands spent of motions which will never be heard. Nice job lawyers! Way to uphold the professional standards! Geniuses can’t even read, apparently.
Folks, lesson for ya: high cost does not equal quality when it comes to legal representation.
Prediction: court will stay proceedings pending the commission hearing?? Ummmm, duuhhhhhh!