Zuffa has filed a Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Authority regarding its Motion to Seal related materials in its Summary Judgment motion of Plaintiffs’ lawsuit in their antitrust case.
The supplemental authority is the recent ruling in the Mark Hunt case on Zuffa’s “Renewed” Motion to Seal Documents in that case. The court previously denied the Motion to Seal but changed course in granting the “Renewed” Motion. It should be noted that Hunt’s attorneys did not oppose the “Renewed” motion for some reason.
This Motion hopes to include this ruling in deciding the pending motion before the court in the Antitrust matter. They persuasively argue that Plaintiffs had referred to the previous Hunt ruling where the Court denied the sealing of records. As Zuffa points out in this motion, the original order was “without prejudice” whereas the renewed motion was “with prejudice.” The difference with or without prejudice is that “without” prejudice means that the ruling could be amended on a party’s motion. With prejudice is the final ruling of the Court.
Supplemental Authority After Hunt by JASONCRUZ206 on Scribd
Payout Perspective:
The Hunt ruling, although I disagree with the outcome, will likely be considered in the antitrust case as it relates to similar documents. Thus, the motion will be granted, and the Court will consider it as persuasive authority when determining whether or not to unseal the redacted materials by Zuffa.
Leave a Reply