Lyman Good’s lawsuit against the nutritional supplement maker does not appear to be going well. This is based on the recently released transcript in which the Court has questions about Good’s theory of the case and the absence of the alleged supplement which caused his failed USADA drug test.
The defendants, Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals, Vitamin Shoppe and Gaspari Nutrition filed a motion to dismiss the case based on the spoliation of evidence (i.e., the loss of the bottle of Anavite Good claims caused the failed result.
Below are excerpts from the oral argument this past August with Good’s lawyers and the defense.
Attorney for Hi-Tech Pharmaceutical, one of the parties Good sued, argues that the loss of the bottle which allegedly caused Good to fail a drug test is gross negligence. #UFC #sportslaw https://t.co/o2jySZq1rv pic.twitter.com/0sRotUR08n
— Jason Cruz (@dilletaunt) January 7, 2020
Good’s attorney, David Fish, did not portray the claims they pled very well as he could not specifically tell the court the theory of the case when asked and could not really give a concrete reason why they did not ensure secure transport of the bottle of Anavite in question from their hands to the lab that they used for testing of it.
Ay dios mio… https://t.co/kJ8yf5XrHY pic.twitter.com/v2Oah56qL5
— Jason Cruz (@dilletaunt) January 7, 2020
The Court probed Good’s attorney about how they would prove that the defendants were liable. It seemed like Good’s attorney does not know.
Court asks Good’s attorney how are they going to prove Anavite was defective…Good’s attorney points to USADA. Court asks how that’s relevant. #UFC #sportslaw https://t.co/KT6asNJWRM pic.twitter.com/QZotHkJXUE
— Jason Cruz (@dilletaunt) January 7, 2020
Notably, the Court was flippant with the mention that USADA believed that the purported reason for Good’s failed drug test was a tainted supplement. Essentially asking Good’s attorney how would USADA’s determination be relevant.
Fish does cite that they are planning to use circumstantial evidence to combat the hurdle of the missing bottle.
It wasn’t all bad for Good #UFC #sportslaw https://t.co/7Q3EVYhTsi pic.twitter.com/my8lH6eFLS
— Jason Cruz (@dilletaunt) January 7, 2020
But then again, the Court doesn’t seem too enthused about Good’s prospects of winning this case.
It wasn’t all bad for Good #UFC #sportslaw https://t.co/7Q3EVYhTsi pic.twitter.com/my8lH6eFLS
— Jason Cruz (@dilletaunt) January 7, 2020
And then… https://t.co/6yfLrYUpsj pic.twitter.com/OGLDFfctLz
— Jason Cruz (@dilletaunt) January 7, 2020
Payout Perspective:
While all is not lost for Good, defendants recently filed Motion for Summary Judgment to dismiss this case entirely looms. The excerpts are not great for the prospects of prevailing in court even if this case were to go to trial.
Leave a Reply