The Court in the Mark Hunt lawsuit against Zuffa, Dana White and Brock Lesnar denied a motion for leave to file exhibits under seal. The defendants’ motion (specifically White and the UFC) sought to seal and redact portions of the 2016 Promotional Agreement with the UFC Heavyweight.
The Court denied the request citing that the public has a right to inspect and copy judicial records. It relied upon the presumption that the records are publicly accessible. The party seeking to seal “bears the burden of overcoming this strong presumption.” The Court makes the distinction that since this is a dispositive motion (a motion that may bring an end to the lawsuit), the party seeking to seal the record “must articulate compelling reasons supported by specific factual findings that outweigh the general history of access and the public policies favoring disclosure…”
The UFC and Dana White attached Hunt’s Bout Agreement for UFC 200 and other Bout Agreements from previous fights on as exhibits to its Motion to Dismiss Hunt’s First Amended Complaint. Denial of its Motion to Seal these documents presumptively means that they would be available for public viewing.
The U.S. Magistrate denied the order and barring an immediate appeal will unseal the documents filed in their motions to dismiss in 14 days.
Order on Motion to Seal by JASONCRUZ206 on Scribd
Payout Perspective:
This is a good ruling for those interested in the case and public access to court records. Notably, the UFC is fighting to maintain records sealed in its Antitrust lawsuit filed by former fighters. In that case, they argue that there is trade secrets/financial information that is confidential. The Court should apply the standard here which requires a burden of overcoming the presumption is publicly accessible. For the Hunt case, it will be an interesting look (not since the Eddie Alvarez lawsuit) into the terms of a current UFC bout agreement.
Leave a Reply