• 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

Diaz petition for judicial review of Nevada suspension, fine denied

February 20, 2013 by Jason Cruz 3 Comments

A Nevada Court has denied Nick Diaz’s request for a judicial review of his drug suspension.  Diaz was seeking review of his drug suspension for not disclosing his marijuana use and fine fo $79,500.

The order which recites the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law found substantial evidence that Diaz used marijuana, a banned substance per the NAC, after testing positive following his post-UFC143 urine test.  The use was a violation.  The Court concluded that Diaz understood that his use of marijuana should have been disclosed to the Commission and on its pre-fight questionnaire. Paragraph 9 of the Findings of Fact states the Court found Diaz’s credibility questionable as it believes Diaz should have known that he should have disclosed his medical condition which requires he be prescribed marijuana.

In sum, Diaz’s request for judicial review is denied and his lawsuit against the Commission is over.

Payout Perspective:

Since Diaz is main eventing in March against GSP, its hard to see the damage done to Diaz.  The UFC can set up matches for Diaz outside of Nevada until his suspension is over and the fine is minimal considering he is heading to a main event payday in March.  Of course, the Court questioning his credibility may hurt Diaz’s feelings but that’s all it really does.  The legal arguments made by Diaz’s counsel were the best that could be done (see here) for what amounted to a losing argument.

Filed Under: Drug Testing, legal, NSAC, regulation, UFC

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Machiel Van says

    February 21, 2013 at 8:35 am

    I think it’s total BS that the issue of metabolites vs actual marijuana in his system was never explicitly addressed throughout this process. NSAC has no acountability whatsoever. I hope the UFC ditches the SACs and self-regulates one day.

    Reply
  2. Jason Cruz says

    February 21, 2013 at 10:02 am

    MV,

    Good point. I think that’s a question for his attorneys. As for regulation, I’m not sure if the UFC really wants that burden but it would certainly be helpful with drug testing. Who knows? With Dana coming down on TRT we may see it some day.

    Reply
  3. Brain Smasher says

    February 21, 2013 at 4:11 pm

    I dont think the UFC can legally opportate without State Athletic Commission sanctioning. If the UFC could have governed themselves they would have done that in the first place. They didnt because just about every state wouldnt allow it.

    The only leverage the UFC has over Athletic commission is they can avoid running events in that state and cost the commission a lot of money. Outside of that they have no control.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Primary Sidebar

Featured

Court moves Ortiz case to arbitration

Dominance responds to Motion to Compel

Pac-May II set for September

Judge hears arguments in Golden Boy TRO request

Golden Boy files Reply Brief in support of TRO

Ortiz files opposition to TRO

Archives

MMA Payout Follow

MMAPayout

Wolfe downgrades TKO after strong rally

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

For the first time, here's a link to "Private Equity in College Sports," written by @SunealBedi, John Holden and myself, and forthcoming in Volume 111 of @MinnesotaLawRev:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=6349318

Failed MMA fighter, but successful plumber and drafter of a cut and paste version of the mUhammAD aLi act takes over of Homeland Security

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

Kristi, you’re fired!

(Yes, I had this ready)

Load More

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