The Cobra
05-06-2015, 01:56 PM
Two disgruntled boxing fans are suing Manny Pacquiao for failing to disclose a shoulder injury before his fight against Floyd Mayweather. Since the fight, it has been announced that Pacquiao has a torn right rotator cuff and will need surgery.
Staphane Vanel and Kami Rahbaran have filed a $5 million dollar class action lawsuit against Pacquiao, promotion company Top Rank, its president Todd DuBoef, promoter Robert Arum and Pacquiao's advisor, Michael Koncz.
Vanel and Rahbaran filed the lawsuit on behalf of people who bought tickets to the fight, purchased the pay per view service and/or wagered on the fight. According to the lawsuit (or Complaint), "Pacquiao and others assisting him checked "No" on the NAC questionnaire which asked if he had a shoulder injury."
They are alleging that Pacquiao failed to disclose a shoulder injury he suffered to the "general public or even to the Nevada Athletic Commission" and that Pacquiao "made misrepresentations in documents to the Nevada Athletic Commission" that he was not injured. As a result, those that invested in the fight were harmed and should be compensated.
So the Plaintiffs are basically arguing that had Pacquiao and his team revealed the true nature of an injury that "would severely affect his performance", people would not have spent money or bet on the fight.
Insofar as the legal basis of the lawsuit, Vanel and Rahbaran have relied on fraud, alleging that the Defendants "engaged in predatory, wrongful, fraudulent and deceptive trade practices". That fraud, they argue, caused financial damage to the Plaintiffs.
While it's understandable that some fans feel victimized by the outcome of the fight, this lawsuit is likely to go nowhere fast. Fans have filed these types of lawsuits before without success. The only certainty in sports is uncertainty and judges get that.
You need only look to Spygate for an example.
During a Sept. 9, 2007 game between the New York Jets and the New England Patriots at Giants Stadium, an employee of the Patriots was caught videotaping signals given by the Jets' coaches. Ultimately, it was determined that this incident was part of a "scheme" dating back to 2000 when Belichick became the Patriots' head coach. Belichick and the Patriots were hit with fines totalling $750,000 and ordered to forfeit draft picks.
That wasn't enough for Jets fan Carl J. Mayer, who launched a class action lawsuit against the Patriots, Belichick and the NFL on behalf of Jets season ticket holders. The lawsuit alleged that by videotaping signals from the New York Jets' coaches, the Patriots had rigged the games against the Jets thereby defrauding fans.
Mayer alleged that the Patriots and Belichick interfered with ticket-holders' contractual relations, committed fraud, violated consumer protection laws, engaged in deceptive business practices and violated state and federal racketeering laws. Mayer also alleged that the NFL's destruction of the videotapes was a breach of contract. Mayer was asking for $61,600,000, which would have been tripled to a total of $184,800,000 under fraud legislation.
Both the district and appellate courts had previously dismissed the case. Basically, the Courts found that by virtue of his ticket, Mayer possessed nothing more than a contractual right to a seat from which to watch an NFL game between the Jets and the Patriots, and this right was clearly honored. The District Court wrote that "the uniform weight of established case law holds that a failure to satisfy the subjective expectations of spectators at a sporting event is not actionable under law."
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case.
So while the lawsuit is getting some attention, expect it to fail.
Staphane Vanel and Kami Rahbaran have filed a $5 million dollar class action lawsuit against Pacquiao, promotion company Top Rank, its president Todd DuBoef, promoter Robert Arum and Pacquiao's advisor, Michael Koncz.
Vanel and Rahbaran filed the lawsuit on behalf of people who bought tickets to the fight, purchased the pay per view service and/or wagered on the fight. According to the lawsuit (or Complaint), "Pacquiao and others assisting him checked "No" on the NAC questionnaire which asked if he had a shoulder injury."
They are alleging that Pacquiao failed to disclose a shoulder injury he suffered to the "general public or even to the Nevada Athletic Commission" and that Pacquiao "made misrepresentations in documents to the Nevada Athletic Commission" that he was not injured. As a result, those that invested in the fight were harmed and should be compensated.
So the Plaintiffs are basically arguing that had Pacquiao and his team revealed the true nature of an injury that "would severely affect his performance", people would not have spent money or bet on the fight.
Insofar as the legal basis of the lawsuit, Vanel and Rahbaran have relied on fraud, alleging that the Defendants "engaged in predatory, wrongful, fraudulent and deceptive trade practices". That fraud, they argue, caused financial damage to the Plaintiffs.
While it's understandable that some fans feel victimized by the outcome of the fight, this lawsuit is likely to go nowhere fast. Fans have filed these types of lawsuits before without success. The only certainty in sports is uncertainty and judges get that.
You need only look to Spygate for an example.
During a Sept. 9, 2007 game between the New York Jets and the New England Patriots at Giants Stadium, an employee of the Patriots was caught videotaping signals given by the Jets' coaches. Ultimately, it was determined that this incident was part of a "scheme" dating back to 2000 when Belichick became the Patriots' head coach. Belichick and the Patriots were hit with fines totalling $750,000 and ordered to forfeit draft picks.
That wasn't enough for Jets fan Carl J. Mayer, who launched a class action lawsuit against the Patriots, Belichick and the NFL on behalf of Jets season ticket holders. The lawsuit alleged that by videotaping signals from the New York Jets' coaches, the Patriots had rigged the games against the Jets thereby defrauding fans.
Mayer alleged that the Patriots and Belichick interfered with ticket-holders' contractual relations, committed fraud, violated consumer protection laws, engaged in deceptive business practices and violated state and federal racketeering laws. Mayer also alleged that the NFL's destruction of the videotapes was a breach of contract. Mayer was asking for $61,600,000, which would have been tripled to a total of $184,800,000 under fraud legislation.
Both the district and appellate courts had previously dismissed the case. Basically, the Courts found that by virtue of his ticket, Mayer possessed nothing more than a contractual right to a seat from which to watch an NFL game between the Jets and the Patriots, and this right was clearly honored. The District Court wrote that "the uniform weight of established case law holds that a failure to satisfy the subjective expectations of spectators at a sporting event is not actionable under law."
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case.
So while the lawsuit is getting some attention, expect it to fail.