• 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

Jury finds in favor of CM Punk in defamation trial brought by WWE doctor

June 5, 2018 by Jason Cruz Leave a Comment

Chicago Tribune reporter Gregory Pratt reports that a jury has found in favor of CM Punk and Colt Cabana in the defamation trial brought by WWE physician Chris Amann.  Per Pratt, the jury deliberated a couple hours before rendering their verdict.

After the podcast, in February 2015, Dr. Amann had sued Punk and Cabana after an infamous podcast where Punk did not hold back in giving his opinion of the physician’s treatment of an injury he sustained.

The doctor brought the suit in Cook County Circuit Court (IL) alleging that Punk and Cabana had made defamatory statements regarding his professional duties as a medical doctor for the company.  Specifically, it was Punk that gave his opinion of the doctor during the podcast.

SI posted an excellent legal analysis of the potential issues of the lawsuit prior to the verdict.  It gave the overarching issue of whether podcasts could be subject to defamation claims.

In closing, the lawyers for the WWE physician requested $3,989,000 in damages which amounted to $1 for ever person who downloaded Cabana’s podcast episode plus additional punitive damages.

Payout Perspective:

Testimony during the trial about the lump on the back of CM Punk appeared to be the key issue.  It was what Punk complained about during the podcast and there was testimony by Punk’s wife (A.J. Lee), massage therapist and others that corroborated Punk’s claim.  Although he may have sensationalized the issue on the podcast, the jury ultimately determined that he was telling the truth and was giving his opinion. Truth is an ultimate defense to defamation.  Notably, SI indicated that Punk was appearing in character on the podcast, which I am not sure was the case and I’m not clear if that hinged on the analysis.  As we know with litigation, it is not over until its over.  There are post-trial motions and the possibility for appeal.

As for Punk, he has his second fight of his UFC career this Saturday in Chicago

Filed Under: Featured, legal, UFC

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Primary Sidebar

Featured

Ortiz files motion to confirm injunction over

Congressional Report on Ali Revival Act released

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

Archives

MMA Payout Follow

MMAPayout

Someone needs to be fired from WSJ

Sohrab Ahmari @SohrabAhmari

Embarrassing.

Time to buy that Prius

Time to write your congress person

John S. Nash @heynottheface

HR 4624 (Muhammad Ali American Boxing Revival Act of 2026) is scheduled for consideration for a vote in the House next week, under suspension of the rules (limit of 40 minutes for debate, no amendments are allowed, and needs a 2/3 vote to pass.)

No matter what that UFC White House is going to happen

Barak Ravid @BarakRavid

🚨🚨🚨Trump on Truth Social: Israel, out of anger for what has taken place in the Middle East, has violently lashed out at a major facility known as South Pars Gas Field in Iran. A relatively small section of the whole has been hit. The United States knew nothing about this

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

Contrary to Trump’s statements, senior Israeli and U.S. officials said that the United States had prior knowledge of the Israeli strike and even approved it in an attempt to pressure Iran. After the Iranians retaliated against Qatar’s gas fields, Trump is now changing course

Load More

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