• 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

Court in UFC Antitrust Lawsuit decline legal “hot-tub”

December 2, 2018 by Jason Cruz Leave a Comment

The Court in the UFC Antitrust lawsuit has ruled that there not be an evidentiary hearing on the admissibility of expert reports and testimony prior to the December 14th Motion for Summary Judgment and Class Certification hearing.

The Court issued a Minute Order late last week:

The Court has considered the Request [ECF No. [617]] for an evidentiary hearing. The Court DENIES this request at this time. The Court will the hear arguments of counsel and make a determination at the hearing on December 14, 2018 whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary to decide the Motion To Certify [ECF No. [518]].

As we explained in this post, the hearing requested by Zuffa was to determine expert testimony and the admissibility of the same.  The Plaintiffs argued that Zuffa was asking for a reconsideration of a evidentiary hearing to determine the expert testimony.  As Plaintiffs point out, the Motion to Certify the Class occurs on December 14th and would require a delay in that decision if they were to entertain such a hearing.

Payout Perspective:

A minor victory for the Plaintiffs here as it does not have to prepare for another hearing in this lawsuit.  It also prevents a determination on the evidence prior to the class certification hearing.  While the Court may still request an evidentiary hearing at some point, it saw no reason to do it prior to next Friday’s big day.  One might take this as good news for Plaintiffs if you think that the Court was concerned about the information that it needed another day to decide the evidence in this case.  Of course, the court’s calendar could be so full, there was just not enough time to slot it in before the 14th.  MMA Payout will keep you posted.

Filed Under: Antitrust Class Action, legal, UFC

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Primary Sidebar

Featured

The Legal Submission 109 takes a look at TKO Earnings

Plaintiffs in Johnson antitrust lawsuit file statement prior to status conference

Despite two big losses, TKO touts another solid quarter

Muhammad Ali American Boxing Revival Act of 2026 introduced into Senate with minor changes

Plaintiffs file Answering Brief in Cirkunov Antitrust Appeal

Jai Opetaia files a lawsuit against IBF

Archives

MMA Payout Follow

MMAPayout

Dude just found a way to beat kids legally

They took him out three batters later

Ryan @RyanF786

THE GREATEST LL MOUND VISIT OF ALL TIME!!

“If you walk the next 5 batters Jesus is still lord,if you strikeout the next 5 batters Jesus is still lord”

🙏🏻 ✝️🙏🏻✝️ #llws #espn #patmcafee

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

"if this mf would have just shook my hand..."

And the Mariners tried to piggy back him

Chris Cochran @bestcoastbias

Castillo with 50% called strike + whiff rate today on his change up. Significant uptick in usage compared to his season totals.

Company line for Mackenzie.

MMA Junkie @MMAJunkie

"Traditional" Mackenzie Dern doesn't share #UFC330 headliner Ian Machado Garry's stance on women running the world.

"I like the man taking the lead."

Load More

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