Mixed Martial Arts Law Blog : Mixed Martial Arts Lawyer & Attorney : David Nelmark : Belin Lamson McCormick Zumbach Flynn Law Firm : Intellectual Property, Media Law : Des Moines, Iowa

Willamette Week Online has reported that Matt "The Law" Lindland has sued former TUF contestant Gerald "Hurricane" Harris for allegedly failing to pay management fees.

Harris had previously been interviewed about his departure from Lindland's Team Quest after Harris appeared on The Ultimate Fighter's seventh season.  Thus, the dispute may stem from confusion over whether the departure from the camp also ended the representation agreement.

As the economy continues to struggle, I expect to see more of these kinds of suits.     

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In the Complaint filed in the Ibarra vs. Ortiz, et. al. defamation lawsuit, Ibarra's counsel refers to Quinton "Rampage" Jackson as "a prominent figure in the Ultimate Fighting Champion industry." While I'm not sure if this was a reference to the Zuffa-owned Ultimate Fighting Championship or the broader industry of mixed martial arts, the unusual choice of words did remind me the I first heard the UFC referenced in a trial--back in December 2006.

Our client had been assaulted by carnival workers at a fair.  Our star witness was a member of the Army who practiced MMA in his spare time.  He stumbled onto the assault, grounded some carnies, and may have saved our client's life.  The defense attorney discovered the witness's MySpace page, which prominently featured Chuck Liddell and other UFC images. His cross examination began like this:

Attorney: Do you have pictures from something called the U-F-C on your MySpace page?

Witness: Yes.

Attorney: What does that stand for?

Witness:  The Ultimate Fighting Championship.

Attorney:  And does U-F-C also stand for Ultimate Fight... CLUB!

Witness:  No.

This was followed by a long, awkward pause.  

Unlike the witness (and me), opposing counsel was obviously not counting the days until the upcoming Liddell-Ortiz rematch.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Ibarra defamation lawsuit is interesting in that Ibarra sued not only Tito Ortiz (who allegedly made the defamatory comments), but also Punch Drunk Gamer (who conducted the interview in which the comments were made) and just about every MMA blog that subsequently reported Ortiz's allegations including Bloody Elbow, Five Ounce of Pain and Yahoo!.

How can Ibarra do this?  Generally, someone (or some blog) that repeats a defamatory statement is just as liable as the person who originally made the statements.  There is a principle called "neutral reportage" which sometimes protects media outlets that simply report that X made an allegation about Y, but this principle does not apply in California unless the person defamed is a "public figure."  If Ibarra is found to be a "public figure" his lawsuit likely fails anyway, so the "neutral reportage" doctrine offers little additional help for the blogosphere in this case.

Although I enjoy litigating defamation cases, I have no desire to be the defendant in one.  Therefore, I will not repeat Dana White's comments about Ibarra, which can be found at cagewriter. (Warning - as usual, White's comments contain profanity.)  I will however be keeping an eye out for a future Ibarra lawsuit listing cagewriter, YouTube, and ESPN Radio 1100 as defendants. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

For a good explanation on the weaknesses with Juanito Ibarra's lawsuit against Tito Ortiz, see Todd Martin's piece on MMAPayout.com.  The article explains that to have any real chance of success, Ibarra must prove he is a "private figure" rather than a "public figure."  

One factor generally considered in determining whether someone is a public figure is whether he has "access to the media."  This makes sense.  If news outlets are willing to report what someone says, that person has an easier time refuting any false statements made about them.  (I, however, do not have "access to the media."  That's why I have a blog.)

As an example of Ibarra's "access to the media," I found an interview Ibarra gave to a website called ThaFormula.com.  The most interesting thing about the interview is that Ibarra was hardly shy about sharing his own negative opinions of others in the MMA world.   Is Ortiz calling Ibarra a "thief" any more derogatory than Ibarra saying Chuck Liddell was intimidated by Rampage or that Vitor Belfort lacked heart? 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link