UFC antitrust lawsuit back in court February 2025

UFC Antitrust Lawsuit Back In Court February 2025The Le vs. Zuffa antitrust lawsuit will officially land back in court for a hearing next year, as soon…

UFC Antitrust Lawsuit Back In Court February 2025

The Le vs. Zuffa antitrust lawsuit will officially land back in court for a hearing next year, as soon as February – as per a ruling this week from sitting judge, Richard Boulware.

The lawsuit, filed initially back in 2014 against the organization by the likes of a slew of fighters including former middleweights, Cung Le, and Nate Quarry – despite a prior settlement agreement in relation to the lawsuit earlier this annum. 

49398340440

The initial settlement struck was set to pay out $335,000,000 in relation to two separate lawsuits filed – one covering athletes under the banner of the promotion between 2010 and 2017, as well as other fighters covered from 2017 to the present day.

cung le

Judge Boulware, who has confirmed how the antitrust lawsuit will land back in court on February 3. next, – stated how he had objected the settlement struck earlier this year, questioning if the payment settled on seemed low and how fighters represented in the second lawsuit could take the decision to object to arbitration and further class-action waiver clauses. (H/T MMA Fighting)

Dana White plans to scrap bonus pay increase after UFC 304: 'There was no sense of urgency'

UFC antitrust lawsuit set to return to court in February next year

The antitrust lawsuit initially filed against the promotion alleges that the UFC had participated “in a scheme to acquire and maintain monosopy power in the market for elite professional MMA fighter services.” Furthermore, these alleged practices were achieved through the implementation of exclusive contracts for talent, methods of coercion, and the acquisition of other fighting promotions in a bid to eliminate competitors to their brand and roster. 

Prior to the judge’s ruling, Eric Cramer, who is the lead attorney for fighters said: “They’d be better off both taking the money, getting the injunctive relief. The world where that doesn’t happen is not in that fighter’s interests because I would tell that fighter if they were in my office, ‘You’re likely to lose. You’re likely to get nothing.’”

Exclusive – Trial or settlement? Lawyer reacts to looming UFC antitrust courtroom decision

Exclusive - Trial or settlement? Lawyer reacts to looming UFC antitrust courtroom decisionCombat Sports Law writer Erik Magraken weights the possibilities for UFC’s antitrust lawsuits.

Exclusive - Trial or settlement? Lawyer reacts to looming UFC antitrust courtroom decision

Months after UFC was nearing a deal that would potentially free them from facing accusations of antitrust practices in a legal setting ever again, they will soon find out if that beneficial agreement will actually come to fruition.

Earlier this year, the promotion was ready to cut a check worth $335 million and agree to some contractual changes in exchange for eliminating a pair of class action lawsuits representing groups of fighters. This deal, while in the nine-figures, was significantly less than the potential billions of dollars that a lawsuit would cause in damages. And due to a waiver in newer UFC contracts that prevents fighters from ever entering into class action lawsuits, the payment would mark an end to the possibility of fighters banding together to challenge the MMA goliath’s power.

The agreement was seen as the possible end to a decade-long battle in the sport. But in recent weeks the deal has seemingly come close to falling apart, as signaled by comments made by U.S. Nevada District Judge Richard F. Boulware.

Despite the settlement from the UFC being agreed upon by both plaintiff classes—the Cung Le et al. group representing talent from 2010 to 2017 and the Kajan Johnson et al. group for fighters who competed from 2017 to 2023—and the UFC, an important third party must also sign off on a class action deal in American court cases: The Judge. And in this scenario, Judge Boulware has shown significant concern about the deal.

dana white missouri

Alarm bells first sounded in June, when the Nevada judge first voiced his “serious concerns” about the agreement. Some alterations were made to the deal later that month in hopes of appeasing the judge, who mentioned that the Le class was not getting enough in comparison to the $800 million to $1.6 billion they looked to earn in damages from a trial.

As reported by John S. Nash, the adjusted deal would give the Le group 90 percent of the cash damages, up from the 75 percent they were guaranteed in the previous deal. This seemingly did little to impress Judge Boulware, who appeared in a courtroom once again last week to list off a series of qualms he had with the proposal.

After a few weeks of discussion between the judge and the parties involved, Josh Gross is reporting that we’re expected to hear his decision on the deal this week. The ruling is a turning point in the legal battle, either putting an end to the saga or simply beginning a new chapter.

The Judge Doesn’t Seem Convinced

Due to both the financial details and the brief injunctive relief that is placed into the agreement, Judge Boulware has explicitly shown significant hesitancy. Canadian lawyer and Combat Sports Law writer Erik Magraken said while we don’t know what the Judge will decide, it’s not entirely shocking that he has given some pause regarding the deal.

“The judge is of a very strong view that the UFC is operating as an illicit monopsony,” Magraken said. “And now he’s being asked to approve a settlement that’s gonna resolve two class actions, which basically are gonna lock in the UFC into a position of power. The judge is struggling with that outcome. So to me, it’s not terribly surprising that he’s hesitant to sign off on it.”

Judge Boulware has expressed concern about the contractual changes that UFC is forced to abide by in the agreement, arguing it might not be enough to clamp down on the promotion. Courthouse News reported that he specifically said “It is difficult for me to understand why, if Johnson were settling separately, that class members would agree to this amount of injunctive relief.”

When asked about the reason for Judge Boulware’s concern about the changes, Magraken explained how class action cases look not just at the past but toward the future. He highlighted that the importance of a class action case is to bring relief to those wronged in the past while also setting up safeguards that stop the issue from happening again in the future.

ufc antitrust
HOUSTON, TX – AUGUST 07: The UFC Heavyweight title belt awarded to Ciryl Gane at UFC 265 at Toyota Center on July 7, 2021 in Houston, Texas. (Photo by Alex Bierens de Haan/Getty Images )

“One of the purposes of antitrust litigation is not just to compensate people that are harmed by the bad behavior, but it’s to then disrupt that bad behavior,” Magraken explained. “To make it so it can’t be done moving forward. I think the court is simply concerned that once the money changes hands, the UFC is free to keep doing this monopsonistic behavior. And since the fighters have given up their rights to participate in a class action moving forward [due to the class action waivers signed], there’s not going to be a challenge from the labor side of things.”

Revisiting The Possibility of a Trial

Cun Le

Prior to the settlement, the Le class was just weeks away from heading to a jury trial against the UFC. The Johnson case was still looking for class certification, a crucial step needed before heading to trial.

If Judge Boulware decides to reject the settlement, discussions about a possible trial in the future will re-emerge. Magraken explained that this is a potentially riskier scenario for everyone involved: The damages could be higher, including the trebling of financial payouts which is seen in antitrust cases. But also high is the possibility that no money could change hands.

“What does a good day in court look like [for the fighters]? We’ve got the numbers: $1.6 billion being the plaintiff’s high-end estimate of damages, and then that gets tripled … The bad day in court is when it gets dismissed. You’ve got 10 years of litigation and the jury for whatever reason doesn’t buy it, or gives very very low numbers.”

Jury trials are, as Magraken described, unpredictable. It takes just one jury member to throw everything off-course, causing a result that might be unexpected. This explains why jury selection can often be picky by both sides of a lawsuit. Take for example the recent high-profile case where Donald Trump was found guilty of falsifying business records. In that specific scenario, the lawyers looked at 96 New York citizens before finalizing their seven-person jury.

“It’s really tough to know what a handful of strangers off the street in Las Vegas will think of all of this. It’s a complicated case. You’re getting into contracts, you’re getting into economic evidence, you’re getting to a lot of stuff that people don’t deal with in their day-in-day-out lives.”

A decision from Judge Boulware, which reportedly is set for next week, will answer the long-awaited question of whether a settlement can be possible. The deal could get approved, which Magraken said would “lock in UFC’s position of power.” Or the agreement could get called off, putting the fate of a couple of thousand fighters back into the courtroom.

Leaked messages reveals UFC boss Dana White’s trashing of Scott Coker: ‘I turned Ronda Rousey into a star’

Dana White trashes Scott Coker in antitrust lawsuit deposition I turned Ronda Rousey into a star UFCAmid the ongoing antitrust lawsuit brought against the UFC, the promotion’s CEO, Dana White openly criticized Bellator MMA boss,…

Dana White trashes Scott Coker in antitrust lawsuit deposition I turned Ronda Rousey into a star UFC

Amid the ongoing antitrust lawsuit brought against the UFC, the promotion’s CEO, Dana White openly criticized Bellator MMA boss, Scott Coker – claiming the veteran promoter was a bad one at that, as well as taking credit for the stardom amassed by former UFC bantamweight champion, Ronda Rousey.

Dana White claims he turned Ronda Rousey into a star

In leaked text messages obtained by Bloody Elbow and esteemed reporter, John S. Nash, former UFC CEO, Lorenzo Fertitta  claimed that Bellator took “castoffs” from the UFC – in the form of former light heavyweight champions, Quinton Jackson, and Tito Ortiz – in response to a booking of a fight between the duo, as well as labelling Coker a “very bad promoter”.

Question: Okay, what did you understand Mr. Fertitta to be saying there?

Dana White: That Bellator had come out and said, ‘We don’t take UFC castoffs.’

Question: All right. And – but nevertheless, UFC viewed Mr. Ortiz and Mr. Jackson as essentially castoffs?

White: That’s – that’s Scott Coker’s MO. Scott Coker doesn’t build anyone, right? He doesn’yt turn anybody into stars. He just takes old names and recycles them. He’s a – he – he’s a very, very bad promoter.

Question: Okay.

Dana White: Very bad at what he does.

Question: All right. And that’s a – that’s – you’re saying that – I just want to understand you. Because Mr. Coker’s been in several different promotions, right?

White: Right.

Question: Okay.

White: All failures. 

And during the deposition, White claimed that while inaugural UFC bantamweight champion< Rousey was signed from the Coked-led Strikeforce banner, where she also held championship spoils, it was he, not Coker who made the Riverside native a “star” – before claiming Coker should “open a restaurant”, if he couldn’t, in his opinion, turn her into a star.

Question: Right. Is it your – not withstanding the fact that the UFC got some – I think as you testified earlier, some really great fighters from Mr. Coker’s Strikeforc promotion, right?

Dana White: That we turned into stars. When you have Ronda Rousey and you can’t turn her into a star, you should probably go open a restaurant or something.

Question: And so – and so is it your testimony that at Bellator, Mr. Coker is continuing to ressntially recycle has-been fighters? Is that –

White: Well, no. He – he recycles big names.

Question: Right.

White: “That’s what he does. Rampage Jackson is a huge name. Tito Ortiz is a huge name. And – and basically, he re– you know, takes guys with big names and puts on fights with them instead of turning guys into stars, even when he has a roster packed with stars, and one of them include Ronda Rousey.

Question: Well, Ronda Rousey wasn’t a star at the time that she was fighting under contract with Strikeforce, right?

White: ‘Till I turned her into a star.

White: Just for the record, I turned her into a star immediately when she got to the UFC – 

Question: Okay.

White – her first fight.

Dana White Suggests Judge’s Rejection Of UFC Antitrust Settlement Could Be Personal: ‘Me & Lorenzo Went To High School With Him!’

In the eyes of UFC CEO Dana White, the rejection of the settlement in the UFC’s antitrust, class-action lawsuits was more than just business — it was personal. White recently sat down for an interview with Kevin Iole. During it, he made his first public comments about the class-action lawsuits since Judge Richard Boulware formally […]

Continue Reading Dana White Suggests Judge’s Rejection Of UFC Antitrust Settlement Could Be Personal: ‘Me & Lorenzo Went To High School With Him!’ at MMA News.

In the eyes of UFC CEO Dana White, the rejection of the settlement in the UFC’s antitrust, class-action lawsuits was more than just business — it was personal.

White recently sat down for an interview with Kevin Iole. During it, he made his first public comments about the class-action lawsuits since Judge Richard Boulware formally rejected the $335 settlement from the UFC’s parent company, TKO Holdings Group.

White feels that Boulware’s actions went beyond legalities and may have been based on a personal grudge, with White — who says he usually lets the UFC’s legal team deal with matters involving things like this — claiming that he and Lorenzo Fertitta, former UFC CEO, went to high school with Boulware.

“It’s getting to a point now where this feels personal. You know I went to high school with this guy? Me and Lorenzo went to high school with him. I don’t know what me or Lorenzo did to him in high school, but this seems very, very personal.

“I don’t think I did anything to this guy. I don’t know what the hell happened, but there’s no doubt in my mind that this feels absolutely personal. And whatever it is with this guy, we’ll let the lawyers deal with it, and it is what it is.”

Dana White Claims Judge’s Rejection Of UFC Antitrust Lawsuit Settlement Stems From ‘Personal’ High School Grudge

In March, TKO agreed to the $335 million payout to settle a pair of class-action lawsuits brought against the UFC, [Cung] Le et al. vs. Zuffa and [Kajan] Johnson et al. vs. Zuffa. The plaintiffs were seeking $1.6 billion in damages and contractual changes to UFC contracts.

Boulware, in previous weeks, had express concern about the settlement for various reasons. Firstly, the amount obtained in the settlement greatly differed from what the plaintiffs were originally seeking, creating concern over how much each fighter would actually receive from this.

Secondly, each class-action lawsuit had a different focus, with the Le case centered around money and the Johnson case focused on contractual changes. Boulware expressed worry that this settlement did little to nothing for fighters represented in the Johnson case.

A jury trial is currently scheduled to begin on October 28 for Le vs. Zuffa. Johnson vs. Zuffa, meanwhile, is still in a very early portion of the legal process.

Continue Reading Dana White Suggests Judge’s Rejection Of UFC Antitrust Settlement Could Be Personal: ‘Me & Lorenzo Went To High School With Him!’ at MMA News.

Union in Labor Dispute With Fertitta-Owned Station Casinos Launches Formal Antitrust Complaint With FTC About Zuffa


(Apparently, you don’t f*ck with a union spurned.)

Culinary Workers Union Local 226 — the group that is battling Station Casinos to unionize its hotel and casino workers — launched a new salvo against the casino’s owners Frank and Lorenzo Fertitta, who also own a majority stake in the UFC and Strikeforce yesterday by firing off a letter of complaint to Federal Trade Commission Director Richard Feinstein in which they request that the FTC launch an investigation against Zuffa for what they deem as “a violation of anti-trust laws.”

According to the complaint, sent to CagePotato.com today by the union, Zuffa’s practices of buying out the competition like they did with PRIDE, the WEC, WFA and Strikeforce, their institution of champion’s clauses, automatic contract renewal clauses and guaranteed first negotiation periods in fighters’ contracts, their control of fighter image and likeness rights in perpetuity and their refusal to co-promote all put artificial restraints on athlete movement, depress pay and stifle competition.


(Apparently, you don’t f*ck with a union spurned.)

Culinary Workers Union Local 226 — the group that is battling Station Casinos to unionize its hotel and casino workers — launched a new salvo against the casino’s owners Frank and Lorenzo Fertitta, who also own a majority stake in the UFC and Strikeforce yesterday by firing off a letter of complaint to Federal Trade Commission Director Richard Feinstein in which they request that the FTC launch an investigation against Zuffa for what they deem as “a violation of anti-trust laws.”

According to the complaint, sent to CagePotato.com today by the union, Zuffa’s practices of buying out the competition like they did with PRIDE, the WEC, WFA and Strikeforce, their institution of champion’s clauses, automatic contract renewal clauses and guaranteed first negotiation periods in fighters’ contracts, their control of fighter image and likeness rights in perpetuity and their refusal to co-promote all put artificial restraints on athlete movement, depress pay and stifle competition.

It’s worth noting that this is the same union that financially supported Bob Reilly’s re-election campaign in New York and who has been feeding the oblivious State Assemblyman lines about the Fertittas and Zuffa being sinister entities. There’s a pretty good chance they are angling at getting the FTC to force the sport to adopt a fighters union as well, but time will tell.

The CWU, who are a branch of the Unite Here group of unions that represent hotel, gaming, food service, manufacturing, textile, distribution, laundry, and airport workers in the U.S. and Canada, are asking that the FTC begin a thorough investigation into Zuffa’s contravention of the FTC Act which “prohibits unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce.”

The funny thing is, the FTC has already been investigating the UFC and Strikeforce parent company, and not surprisingly, the claim of a monopoly and of anti-trust violation has been vehemently denied by UFC president Dana White.

We’ll have to wait and see if the results of the FTC probe are made public and if they find any wrongdoing on the part of Zuffa.

110831_letter_ftc-re-mma_final-1

Picture 1 of 4

Image