News Mark Hunt ordered to pay nearly 400k in UFC's legal costs lol

As far as final and conclusive, it's an interesting question. But for the most part, a court ordered settlement of legal fees is pretty conclusive.

Hunt's lawyers successfully argued in front of the Ninth Circuit to reverse the lower district courts decision to dismiss the fraud and battery claims lawsuit. That means the lower District Court in Nevada is ordered to hear his case.

Despite the litigation still proceeding, the District Court judge ordered the lawyer fees this thread/article is discussing. Now you really need to start unpacking reciprocity between US and Australian interpretations here, but it seems to me its reasonable to argue Hunt isn't the 'loser' yet and should not be required to pay in advance of the matter at hand being heard.
 
Why did you say "crazy obsessed ex girlfriend" instead of "crazy obsessed ex boyfriend" Mark Hunt is a man, not a woman. I feel like that analogy shows a implicit bias against a certain gender.

Lmao!
 
How?
The FBI can go to a third country and seize assets?
Why FBI? Mark is not a drug lord. Court ruling are recognized among different countries, both criminal and civil rulings. Of course will need to be a sentence not subject to be appealed etc ... takes a long way, but of course if they go after Mark and he has assets in Australia they can seize them.
 
Hunt's lawyers successfully argued in front of the Ninth Circuit to reverse the lower district courts decision to dismiss the fraud and battery claims lawsuit. That means the lower District Court in Nevada is ordered to hear his case.

Despite the litigation still proceeding, the District Court judge ordered the lawyer fees this thread/article is discussing. Now you really need to start unpacking reciprocity between US and Australian interpretations here, but it seems to me its reasonable to argue Hunt isn't the 'loser' yet and should not be required to pay in advance of the matter at hand being heard.

You made a series of good points, and my knowledge of the law in either the US or Australia is nowhere near good enough to say anything here with certainty. But it seems to me to be a common practice to order the payment of court fees once a case is dismissed, ongoing appeals notwithstanding, based on the simple fact that appeals can drag out forever. But if part of the case was remanded to the lower court, that throws a wrench in that argument, doesn't it?
 
Hunt has to prove the UFC knew before hand, and they covered up allowing Brock to fight. I'll leave it up to you to search and see if Hunt proved his case.

Looks clean to me, prob just lifts a few times a week down at the local YMCA.

brock-lesnar-steroids.jpeg
 
He never had a point. It was a frivolous suit. So he gets to pay for it.

Didn't the UFC give Lesnar a pass on his 6 month testing pool re-introduction or something? Or else ignore some positive tests? Thought there was something sketchy with the whole thing that woulda given it some legs.
 
Hunt was one of those rare guys that was getting a fat paycheck per fight because of his achievements in other organizations correct?
Just like Overeem he was getting like 600-800k per fight I thought?
They both got fat paychecks because the ufc signed them to fat paychecks.
 
I still don't understand how people are hating on Hunt or making fun of him for this lawsuit. He's not the smartest guy in the world and says some stupid things but how can you be on UFC's side here?

The idea is that UFC bypassed USADA, allowed Brock to cheat and they all made a ton of money from it. Brock ended up popping after the fight, had the fight turned to a NC, paid a small fine and made....MILLIONS of dollars alongside the UFC who made MILLIONS of dollars.

That would be like robbing a bank, stealing millions of dollars, getting caught and then being ordered to pay $1000 and you keep everything else you stole. Is that not a problem?

Hunt should have never said that he didn't care if Brock was on steroids and would still beat him but it doesn't change the fact that Lesnar cheated and both he and the UFC got away with it.
 
I still don't understand how people are hating on Hunt or making fun of him for this lawsuit. He's not the smartest guy in the world and says some stupid things but how can you be on UFC's side here?

The idea is that UFC bypassed USADA, allowed Brock to cheat and they all made a ton of money from it. Brock ended up popping after the fight, had the fight turned to a NC, paid a small fine and made....MILLIONS of dollars alongside the UFC who made MILLIONS of dollars.

That would be like robbing a bank, stealing millions of dollars, getting caught and then being ordered to pay $1000 and you keep everything else you stole. Is that not a problem?

Hunt should have never said that he didn't care if Brock was on steroids and would still beat him but it doesn't change the fact that Lesnar cheated and both he and the UFC got away with it.
All the ufc did was give an exemption to the 6 month rule. That was all. Everyone knew that Brock got that exemption (the same exemption just given to Meisha Tate). He was then tested 8 times before the fight, and flagged on the one that came back after the fight.

Without the exemption Hunt doesn’t fight at 200 and doesn’t get his big payday too. He literally knew exactly what he was getting in to.
 
Some of these responses show exactly why Hunt was talked into filing a lawsuit he could never win. Brock looks like he may have done PED's. Thing is you have to prove UFC knew, arranged the exemption in order for him to do it, and got the results back before the fight and waited until after to post those results in order for the fight to happen.


For that much to happen there would need to be a digital trail for something like that with many people involved, so Hunt should have had an easy time to get that info in court.



Or, UFC did it by the books and Brock's tests came back afterwards and things played out how they appear to have done.

Hunt took an aweful risk without a single iota of proof, and failed.
 
Never understood why people do things like that. A process server is supposed show up and serve them and surprise them. Telling sundering you're going to sue before you even get an attorney just gives them time to prepare to Sean with you and get the ducks in a row.
I honestly dont know if that was a bad move but when seeking legal money, id think you should be hush hush about it.
 
No.. but the UFC would test fighters coming out of retirement. However the elected to waive this protocol for Lesnar's return fight.. why would they do that? It would indicate that they knew he would test positive.
Agreed, mate -- I'm not siding with Hunt and how he treated this situation, but this is blatantly obvious to me. The UFC knew from a mile away there was a strong likelihood he would pop for steroids.
 
Agreed, mate -- I'm not siding with Hunt and how he treated this situation, but this is blatantly obvious to me. The UFC knew from a mile away there was a strong likelihood he would pop for steroids.
if they didn't waive the 6 month rule he couldn't have fought at ufc 200. they needed big fights for that card after conor dropped out.
 
Back
Top