” And the truth is that the state has much price,” she continued. They should take—they’d be better off both taking the money, getting the injunctive relief … The world where that does n’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 obtain nothing.'”
– Eric Cramer, attorney for UFC fighters, bluntly urging U. S. District Judge Richard Boulware on July 12 to approve the$ 335 million settlement.
When UFC and soldiers in two class action complaints, Cung Le et cetera. v. Zuffa and Kajan Johnson et cetera. v. Zuffa, reached a$ 335 million preliminary settlement in March, a legal battle that began in 2014 was seemingly over.

A Nevada determine, however, may get them to maintain their fight.
U.S. District Judge Richard Boulware has indicated that he may reject the tentative settlement, which would affect nearly 2, 000 soldiers ‘ receiving thousands of dollars in lawsuit funds. Additionally, it may bring on new legal proceedings that neither side wants to bring up and could drag on for years.
The negotiation cannot advance excluded Boulware’s blessing. As the presiding judge, he may decide if the town’s terms and conditions are inherently good, sensible, enough and in the best passions of fighters.
Boulware has objected to some aspects of the negotiation. His concerns are related to the contract, which covers two cases in which the first case, which is weaker, is unlikely to have been brought before, existed.
Le began a decade ago and covers soldiers who were in one or more UFC episodes that took position, or were broadcast, in the U. S. from Dec. 16, 2010, to June 30, 2017. Le was scheduled to start the test in April. Johnson was brought in 2021 and represents those who fought in UFC rounds from July 1, 2017, to the present.
The fighters portray the UFC as a monopsony, which means it has too much business manage over the sale of the services of wealthy fighters. In a more aggressive environment, UFC claims to pay soldiers less money than it would and limits their chances of joining rival MMA deals. The combatants point out that people in the NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL receive only about 20 % of UFC revenue while they only receive about 50 % of their teams ‘ income.
UFC contests those claims both officially and technically. Even if all of the claims made by the fighters are accurate and supported, their argument faces a philosophical stumbling block because UFC fighters are independent contractors and members of NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL players who work for unions that negotiate income shares as part of collective bargaining. No constitutional law establishes that non-unionized employees are entitled to a certain portion of their companies ‘ profits. The argument that fighters would prevail would have an impact on a variety of businesses, and they might sway skeptical administrative judges, including U.S. Supreme Court members.

For two principal motives, Le is a stronger case than Johnson.
Second, Le covers a period—2010 to 2017—when soldiers can point to an MMA market in which UFC had less competition. When the research is focused on the first to late 2010s, the plaintiffs may more accurately portray UFC as dominating the market.
In the framework of the late 2010s to the present, Johnson plaintiffs may have a harder day bringing up the destruction of competition. PFL and another adversary MMA promotion firms have steadily risen in popularity and signed away famous UFC fighters. For instance, PFL signed lightweight champion Anthony Pettis and heavy champion Francis Ngannou, while Bellator persuaded lightweight champion Cris Cyborg and two other well-known combatants, Ryan Bader and Corey Anderson, to work with a rival MMA promotions firm. Maybe pertinently, no MMA development company has sued UFC and accused it of being a dominance. That probably signals UFC foes do n’t regard it as stifling competition.
Second, many soldiers in Johnson have UFC contracts that contain mediation and class-action cancellation provisions, whereas Le and Johnson have not. In contrast, Johnson defendants made a contractual commitment to resolve their disputes by arbitration rather than going to court and not using a group activity to file a lawsuit. Authorities usually find those sorts of clauses binding. Johnson may end up with its soldiers getting little if those clauses were enforced.
The Le plaintiffs receive 90 % of the$ 335 million, while Johnson receives 10 % of the money ( some fighters are in both cases ). The settlement clearly reflects the disparate strength of the two cases. Fighters in Le stand to receive at least$ 13, 000—even if they only fought once — and on average$ 200, 000 with a median recovery of$ 73, 000. One- or two-class fighters who did not sign an arbitration clause may get six or seven-figure sums from many of the 1,500 would get. About 500 would receive more than$ 100, 000, and 36 fighters would land more than$ 1 million. Although UFC has already adopted many of those actions, the settlement also includes language that states that the organization will lighten non-competes and other constraints on soldiers ‘ contracts.
The MMA offers organization made the decision to strike a deal despite UFC’s claim that neither lawsuit has merit. From a chance dislike view, it’s understandable why.
In a “worst-case scenario” for UFC, it could have gone to trial for Le, lost, been ordered to pay somewhere in the ballpark of$ 1 billion to$ 1.6 billion, seen Boulware use antitrust law’s trebling provision to elevate the damages to more than$ 3 billion, and then lost on appeal. UFC instead negotiated a settlement for a hefty figure —$ 335 million —and in exchange landed cost certainty and resolution to both Le and Johnson.
Boulware has objected to the lawsuit in court on the grounds that Johnson soldiers might want to challenge the mediation and class actions waiver provisions and that the amount of money UFC has agreed to pay seems lower.
Boulware’s reluctance has put the fighters ‘ attorneys in the contradictory position of arguing that Johnson is actually a weak case and that Johnson fighters’ securing a share of the$ 335 million deal would be a decisive win.
For most people, including many who may well be living from paycheck to paycheck, these are important amount, according to soldiers ‘ attorneys Eric Cramer in a short. There are thousands of people out there who could actually use that money, according to Cramer during a hearing on July 12; if this arrangement is not reached and we are forced to take this circumstance to test, then we will, and shed, that would be devastating for a lot of individuals. and a lot of cash would be able to be recouped by many individuals.
Cramer has even acknowledged that some Johnson fighters have “weak claims because courts in this country however have enforced mediation clauses in the most ridiculous and hard of circumstances.” He lamented that the Johnson group” just has to ] struggle with it, deal with it, and been rational about it.” The arrangement is an excellent outcome for the Settlement Classes, according to Camer, given the actual risk of losing a test or appeal. He emphasized how the settlement may result in” a large cash recovery” that would be paid out immediately rather than in many years.
Boulware, who is expected to rule on tentative settlement acceptance any time, has three basic choices.
First, the prosecutor had grant tentative approval. This is the typical course of action in a group activity competitive case. The group members would then be informed of their option to withdraw, meaning they could continue to sue UFC while preserving their settlement funds. Additionally, Bouwware would schedule a hearing to consider complaints. He may decide whether to give final approval after hearing from the soldiers and other parties involved.
Next, Boulware may refuse the settlement at this initial stage. Such a maneuver would be incredibly unusual and prevent fighters from having the opportunity to express their opinions immediately. The two cases did go back on the court, and there would be no appeals available to either side. The parties could then negotiate another settlement ( or two settlements, one for Le and one for Johnson ). If not, the circumstances could go on for years in court, where the plaintiffs may lose money on settlements and stand to lose everything.
Third, Boulware may require that he impose a situation that makes the two classes separate before approving. He might rule that neither party needs a distinct attorney because there is too much issue between them. That would put UFC in a position where it could agree to settle only Le, even for less than$ 335 million, since Le and Johnson were likely to be valued more than Le at the same time. Then, on arbitration clause grounds, UFC might accept Johnson’s try to ignore him. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had finally file an appeal and be granted an automatic stay, which may possibly leave Johnson on the court for years without a solution.
What will occur after this fight? It’s up to the judge.