A Nevada court granted in part and denied in part a Motion to Dismiss brought by Wanderlei Silva against the UFC. The lawsuit was brought by the UFC suing Silva for Defamation and Business Disparagement. The case will go forward.
The hearing was moved up from its original hearing date of November 3rd. Attorneys from the UFC sought to strike certain exhibits from the UFC motion to dismiss which included articles from MMA web sites that were attached to prove that Silva’s statements made through Facebook and YouTube were true.
This summer, the UFC filed a defamation lawsuit against Silver over statements he made alleging the UFC of “fight fixing.”
The court dismissed the UFC’s cause of action for business disparagement. However, it granted the UFC the opportunity to amend the complaint. Thus, while it’s dismissed you may look for the UFC to file an amended complaint.
In addition, Silva’s attorneys argued that the UFC’s lawsuit was in violation of Nevada’s Anti-SLAPP statute which precludes lawsuits that seek to chill free speech on matters of public concern. The court denied the Anti-SLAPP motion per stating that Silva’s statements on fight fixing “were not directly connected to public matters” which include the ongoing antitrust lawsuit and his own NAC lawsuit that is being appealed to the Nevada State Supreme Court.
ESPN also reports that a part of the lawsuit related to monetary damages alleged by Zuffa. Per ESPN’s Brett Okamoto, Silva’s attorneys argued that his comments about “fight fixing” were in good faith and broad encompassing matters like “asking an injured athlete to compete or ignoring drug test results.” The court rejected the arguments citing the “plain English” definition of “fight fixing.”
Payout Perspective:
We have a comprehensive breakdown of the Motion to Dismiss here. It appears as though Silva’s legal team earned a minor win at the hearing in dismissing a claim. However, look for the UFC to amend its complaint. It’s interesting that the court denied Silva’s Anti-SLAPP claim citing that the statements were not directly connected to public matters. One would think that the issues (“fixing fights” and health of fighters in a sport where consumers spend money) would be related to a public concern.
The case will now proceed with Silva’s team likely answering an amended complaint and then we will get to the discovery phase. The marquee event will be the anticipated deposition of Silva.
Leave a Reply