UFC Sued by Former Talents, Second Anti-Trust Lawsuit
Former Ultimate Fighting Championship fighters Javier Vasquez and Dennis Hallman filed anti-trust suits against the company Dec. 22 in the same court that received the initial legal claims. Vasquez and Hallman are also represented by the same law firms namely Joseph Savari law Firm, Cohen Milstein Sellers and Toll and Berger and Montague who are currently handling the claims of former and current mixed martial artists Cung Le, Jon Fitch and Nate Quarry.
It is unclear if the two cases will be consolidated into one and will become a class suit given the similar nature of the same claims. The initial case filed involves the allegations against the company headed by UFC President Dana White of illegal market monopolization among other claims. In essence, the suit claims that the UFC has eliminated its competition by barring its current pool of talents to appear in other similar MMA promotional outfits. It expands on the issue by saying that the outfit also disallows its talents to enter into individual marketing agreements with apparel, shoe and other merchandises that will give the athletes extra income. The legal battle is centered on the low compensation the UFC affords its talents on top of it shackling of the other means by which the talents can get endorsement deals.
"They [the UFC] control our likeness," Le told reporters during the filing of the case in Nothern District of California. "They control our career, and that's a choice we as fighters should have. And we don't have that choice."
The UFC has already responded to the allegations but has been reserved on making detailed explanations on the matter. In its official press release, the UFC said that it is working had to "vigorously defend itself and its business practices." At this point, it is unclear if any more fighters will support the current plight of the plaintiffs. Le is the only current player involved in the allegations against the UFC and almost two weeks has passed and the number of claimants on the case has not expanded. It is also unclear why two separate cases were filed before which are essentially claiming for the same causes, making it plausible that the said filings will be consolidated into a single class suit given that the legal representatives of the fighters are one and the same.