In our post from the other day, we took a look at the legal claims by Roy Jones Jr’s Square Ring, Inc that Roy Nelson and Zuffa’s acts constituted a violation of SRI’s contractual rights. The response makes a general blanket denial on most of the major points put forward by Square Ring, Inc., imbued with all the accompanying legalese that these denials entail. The response gets interesting, though, when Zuffa seeks a cross-claim against Roy Nelson in the suit. Justin Klein over at The Fight Lawyer Blog intimated that Zuffa could go after Nelson for fees and any judgement against Zuffa and the cross-complaint by Zuffa makes this case. Zuffa seeks to use the warranty and indemnification clauses in their promotional agreements in order to make sure if there are any real and actual losses in the event of an unfavorable decision in the SRI case, it will be the fighter Roy Nelson that will bear the brunt of these costs and damages, not Zuffa.
Zuffa claims that at the time that Nelson signed his promotional contact for The Ultimate Fighter on June 27th, 2009 he represented and warranted that he was free and clear to sign said contract and was under no other contract or option that would interfere with the performance of his Zuffa contract. Nelson’s promotional contract would kick in in the event that he was named a finalist for TUF Season 10. There are two main points from the Zuffa Standard Contract that are the crux of the UFC’s argument; they read as following:
REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES
Fighter represents and warrants to ZUFFA that:
b. Fighter is free to enter into this Agreement and has not heretofore and will not hereafter enter into any contract, option, agreement or understanding, whether oral or written, which conflicts with the provisions hereof or the grant of Rights contained herein or which would or could interfere with Fighter’s full and complete performance hereunder or the free and unimpaired exercise by ZUFFA of any of the Rights;
INDEMNIFICATION
Fighter shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless ZUFFA, its subsidiaries, affiliates and sponsors, and each of their members, managers, directors, officers, employees, representatives, agents and contractors from and against any claims, actions, proceedings, expenses (including attorneys’ fees of counsel of indemnified party’s choice, as and when incurred) and damages arising from or relating to any negligent or intentional acts or omissions by Fighter or any of Fighter’s Affiliates or by the actual or claimed breach of this Agreement or any Bout Agreement by Fighter or any of Fighter’s Affiliates or the inaccuracy of any of Fighter’s representations, warranties or covenants contained herein or within any Bout Agreement.
In making the finals of the TUF 10, Neslson signed a bout agreement on Oct 3oth, 2009 that triggered the promotional agreement and said provisions in the standard contract. Nelson at that time re-affirmed that all warranties in the agreement were true. In Addition, Zuffa claims that Roy Nelson’s lawyer, Rodney Donohoo, stated in writing that – “I am aware of no contractual obligations which would interfere with Mr. Nelson’s obligations to your organization.” The Donohoo name may ring a bell for MMA legal eagles. Donohoo is also counsel to Ken Shamrock and represented the UFC Hall of Famer in his court case againt the UFC seeking the final fight on his contract with Zuffa. In that case as well, the indemnification clause of the fighter contract was invoked when Shamrocklost the case, which resulted in Ken owing the UFC in excess of $175,000 in lawyer fees.
The Zuffa cross-claim argues that the complained of incidents are not as a result of the actions of Zuffa, but because of the actions and deeds of Nelson and Donohoo. In the case of a loss in the case against SRI, Zuffa requests to be reimbursed by Nelson for the compensatory damages in excess of $10,000, indemnification for any damages awarded to Square Ring, as well as costs associated with the suit and attorney’s fees.
Zuffa are once once again using the heavy hitting duo of Donald Cambell and Colby Williams in this case. Campbell and Williams have been the go-to outside counsel for the UFC. The duo served as counsel for Zuffa in past cases against Randy Couture/HDNet, Ken Shamrock and are currently handling the case of UFC vs. Bellator and Ken Pavia. Legal Counsel to Randy Couture Sam Spira had this to say to Josh Gross on his dealing with the pair: “Don Campbell and Colby Williams are very smart and tough litigants. They serve their client’s well and do not file frivolous complaints.” With a daunting pair of litigants in their stead, the UFC may be able get a decision in their favor that renders the indemnification from Nelson moot, but in any event the fight promotion seems to have covered their bases sufficienctly to make sure they aren’t on the hook legally/financially. Indeed, if I were Mr. Nelson, I wouldn’t be too quick to spend any kind of locker room or knock bonus he may win this weekend, he may have to end up sending it back to his Zuffa minders to cover any of their losses in the court case.