Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
D, a professional boxer, and Johnson, his manager, entered into a boxing promotion agreement dated December 31, 1988, with P, a New York corporation engaging in boxing promotions with its principal place of business in New York. D was paid $25,000 as consideration for entering into the Promotional Agreement. The Agreement was negotiated for D by his manager and his attorney Stephen Enz, who had represented D in past contractual dealings with P. It all took place over the phone or by mail. No face-to-face negotiations took place. The deal was signed through the mail. P got the 'sole and exclusive right to secure and arrange all professional boxing bouts' of D for the term of the Agreement. P obligated itself to promote not less than four bouts requiring Douglas' services during the annual period ending February 25, 1990, and, for two years' thereafter, no less than three bouts per year. P complies with the contract if it has made a 'bona fide offer' to D to promote a bout, 'irrespective of whether such bout actually takes place for any reason other than P's nonperformance.' Purses were subject to a floor of $25,000 and $10,000 in training expenses per bout. The three-year term of the Agreement would be automatically extended in the event D was recognized as world champion, 'to cover the entire period you are world champion and a period of two years following' loss of the title. The Agreement allowed P to promote other professional boxers, including those in the same weight class as D. The Agreement was to be governed, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of New York. D participated in three bouts during the first year, the last of these was the heavyweight championship bout held on February 10, 1990, in Tokyo, Japan between D and the then-heavyweight champion, Michael Tyson. D was to be paid $1.3 million, inclusive of training expenses. D won the bout and became the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world. In Tokyo against Tyson, D was knocked down during the eighth round but came to his feet prior to the referee's conclusion of the count. D knocked out Tyson in the tenth round. P is Tyson's promoter as well and protested at the end of the eighth round that the referee's count had been too long. Formal challenges to the fight decision were filed by the Japanese Boxing Commission and by Tyson with certain boxing governing bodies, apparently predicated on the 'long count' theory. A representative of Mirage contacted D and expressed an interest in having D's next fight at the Mirage Hotel in Las Vegas. P had become aware of Mirage's interest in D. P notified Mirage by letter of P's contractual rights and Mirage obtained and reviewed a copy of the Promotional Agreement. D eventually executed a contract with Mirage. D was to get $50 million for two fights contingent upon P's release its purported exclusive rights or a judicial declaration that the exclusive promotional rights of the Promotion Agreement and Bout Agreement are void and unenforceable. These suits resulted. Most serious is the allegation that P breached duties owed to D by virtue of King's ringside, and post-bout conduct, in Tokyo. In Tokyo, King protested a 'long count' given to D after he was knocked down by Tyson. Tyson was also under a promotional contract with P. King became excited when Tyson knocked D down, yelling words to the effect that the 'fight was over.' D then got up from the count, causing King to say to the head of the World Boxing Council in loud and profane language, that the referee was 'getting his man beat,' that the 'fight was over' and that it ought to be stopped. One half-hour after the fight had concluded, King exited the arena with the official from the World Boxing Council, and was seen gesticulating wildly and yelling at him, as they entered a private area, that things had to be 'straightened out.' Two hours later, the governing bodies announced they would be deliberating as to the proper outcome of the fight. King then played a tape of the eighth round stating that it would demonstrate 'irrefutably' or 'indubitably' that the first knockout canceled the second knockout and that Tyson, therefore, was the champion.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co