• 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

Wanderlei Silva sues NSAC seeking reversal of lifetime ban, fine

January 20, 2015 by Jason Cruz Leave a Comment

MMA Fighting reports that Wanderlei Silva has filed a lawsuit against the Nevada State Athletic Commission.  Silva claims that the commission overstepped its boundaries in issuing him a lifetime ban last year.

In addition to the ban, the NSAC issued a $70,000 fine this past September.  The punishment arose out of his failure to take a drug test in lead-up to a fight with Chael Sonnen this past July.  As we know, the fight never happened.

“This case encapsulates agency aggrandizement at its worst where disciplinary ation was taken against a non-licensed person,” reads the introduction of Silva’s Complaint filed by Ross Goodman in Clark County, Nevada’ District Court.

Silva’s attorney argues that the NSAC did not have jurisdiction over Silva since he was not licensed in the state of Nevada at the time officials attempted to drug test Silva.  Silva’s attorney claims that the statutes which the NSAC must follow only pertain to a “licensee.”

Silva is looking for the NSAC ruling to be reversed and set aside which could the clear pathway for Silva to fight in Nevada again.

Goodman is familiar with combatting the NSAC.  In April 2012, he sued the NSAC on behalf of Nick Diaz.

W. Silva v. Bennett and NSAC

Court filing via MMA Fighting.

Payout Perspective:

As we indicated in December, the process for appeal of an administrative ruling is usually through filing a lawsuit seeking a “petition for review.” Still, we wonder why Silva is going through this legal process when he could work around the suspension in Nevada and still fight. Silva’s attorney makes an interesting legal argument based on the Nevada statutes which the commission must follow. We will see how the judicial system handles interpretation of these statutes and this case.

Filed Under: Featured, legal, NSAC, regulation, review, UFC

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Primary Sidebar

Featured

The Legal Submission 109 takes a look at TKO Earnings

Plaintiffs in Johnson antitrust lawsuit file statement prior to status conference

Despite two big losses, TKO touts another solid quarter

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

Archives

MMA Payout Follow

MMAPayout

In my opinion, d-ck move

MMA Payout @MMAPayout

Attorneys for Floyd #Mayweather have requested a conference take place as the lawyer for CSI Entertainment withdrew its Motion for Preliminary Injunction but preserves its right to bring the motion. May's attys believe its a ploy #boxing

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

We know from disclosure that this was for 2006, the first year they distributed to the shareholders (this was on top of the salary he received every year.) For that year his share was $3.65 million. In 2007 it was $28.575 million. By end of 2010 it would total $83 million.

Attorneys for Floyd #Mayweather have requested a conference take place as the lawyer for CSI Entertainment withdrew its Motion for Preliminary Injunction but preserves its right to bring the motion. May's attys believe its a ploy #boxing

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

A Filipino fisherman reeled in more than he bargained for, when an octopus attached itself to his face, leaving him battling to free himself of the tentacled troublemaker.

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

you call it kidnapping, I say it was a misunderstanding

Load More

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