The attorney for Joshua ‘aka Ernesto’ Ramos filed his opposition to dismissal of his lawsuit against Dana White and Zuffa. Ramos claims that White breached a contract related to knowledge and a videotape of the head of the UFC having sex with his girlfriend.
Opposition to Motion to Dis… by MMA Payout
Zuffa and White argued that the lawsuit by Ramos was preposterous. Moreover, Zuffa argued that the matter did not involve the company. Ramos was arrested and charged with attempted extortion of White by the U.S. Attorney and served a year in prison.
Ramos lawsuit alleges that White agreed to a mediation with him but went to it in bad faith in terms of not offering Ramos any substantive dollar amount as he had expected. Ramos believed that they would be discussing an nondisclosure agreement. According to the opposition brief, the UFC and/or White agreed to pay Ramos and his girlfriend $450,000 and “only four days before announcing the sale of the UFC stated they would not pay Ramos anything.”
“This is a lawsuit stemming from the Defendants’ failed coverup of their own improper actions and their solicitation of an NDA [Non-Disclosure Agreement],” reads the opposition pleading. Ramos argues that White and the company wanted to coverup the affair due to the fact they were selling the company and the negative press might impact the transaction.
In his opposition to dismissing the case, Ramos argues that there was a contract for mediation, which would suggest that the lawsuit survives a motion to dismiss. He also claims that UFC legal counsel, Hunter Campbell was working on a deal with Ramos and was “soliciting silence.”
In addition, Ramos argues that White utilized the UFC to help arrange his girlfriend to travel to a UFC event in Brazil. This would implicate the UFC as well make White guilty of the Mann Act which is a federal wall designed to prosecute those facilitating prosecution across state lines. While no charges have been filed or pending against White, Ramos makes the argument that White is guilty of the legal rule claiming that he paid the Spearmint Rhino for Ramos’ girlfriend to go on the trip.
Payout Perspective:
This will be an interesting hearing come October 7th when the Clark County court hears the arguments on the motion. Zuffa and White will get a chance to reply to this opposition brief prior to the hearing which will likely refute the assertions by Ramos. In addition to hammering in on their legal points that there is not a valid contract between White and Zuffa, they will negate any Mann Act violations on the part of White. MPO will continue to follow.
Leave a Reply