• 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

Hunt’s attorneys oppose Lesnar motion to stay discovery

July 18, 2017 by Jason Cruz Leave a Comment

Mark Hunt’s legal counsel has filed an opposition for Motion to Stay Discovery against Defendant Brock Lesnar.

Lesnar’s counsel has requested a stay of discovery pending their Motion to Dismiss of Hunt’s First Amended Complaint.  The UFC and Dana White have filed a similar Motion to Stay Discovery which would prohibit the exchange of information between parties until the Court rules on the Motions to Dismiss Hunt’s First Amended Complaint.

Hunt’s attorneys argue that they should be allowed to conduct non-RICO discovery which centers around UFC 200 as a compromise to Lesnar.  They point out that 2 of the 7 claims against Lesnar relate to RICO and the other claims do not.  Hence, Hunt should be given the opportunity to investigate his case against Lesnar.  They also claim that Lesnar’s attorneys have not complied with the rule in which the parties are to “meet and confer” in trying to resolve discovery disputes.

Of course, Lesnar opposes this due to the time and expense involved in conducting discovery.  According to Hunt’s attorney, they declined the opportunity to provide initial disclosures and limited fact-discovery of non-RICO claims.  Instead, they informed Hunt that they would file a motion to stay discovery.

Payout Perspective:

From Lesnar’s perspective, it makes sense to avoid the time and expense of providing discovery.  Since Lesnar is likely paying for the defense of the lawsuit himself, it might be an unnecessary cost if the Court decides to dismiss the case.  Yet, Hunt’s attorneys want to push their client’s case since they believe that there is a case and do not want to waste time.  They also appear, at least from a high level, accommodating in stating that they would hold off on RICO-related discovery.  Courts try not to get involved in discovery fights but it seems as though Lesnar’s attorneys want a ruling.  This could all be moot if the Court rules on the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Hunt’s First Amended Complaint.

Filed Under: Hunt v. Zuffa, legal

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Your email address will not be published.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