Bellator files Motion to Dismiss in Alvarez Case; Alvarez responds

Bellator has filed a Motion to Dismiss Eddie Alvarez’s Counterclaims against the organization. The motion will be decided by the Judge without oral argument sometime this month.

As you may recall, the parties had agreed to a couple delays in filing Bellator’s answer in hopes of a possible settlement. Instead, Bellator filed a Motion to Dismiss the substantive legal claims in Alvarez’s countersuit.

The motion seeks to dismiss counts 3 and 4 of Alvarez’s Counterclaims. Those are Tortious Interference with Prospect of Economic Advantage and Breach of Contract.

Bellator’s argues that the matching agreement was confidential and pre-litigation correspondence holds a privilege and is not actionable. It further claims that Bellator had a right to match Zuffa’s offer and Alvarez’s breach of contract claim lacks a factual basis.

Tortious Interference with a Contract must show the following:

1) Plaintiff was in pursuit of business;

2) Interference was done intentionally and with “malice”;

3) Interference caused the loss of prospective gain; and

4) The injury caused damage.

Bellator suggests that Alvarez did not prove this because it had a contractual right to match. Bellator stresses the fact that for Alvarez to prove his claim, there must be a showing that Bellator submitted its matching contract with intentionally doing this without justification or excuse (i.e., the “malice” component). It also cites case law which states that “legitimate business reasons” was “justification” significant to deny a successful tortious interference claim. Here, Bellator’s right to match Zuffa’s offer is its argument that Alvarez’s claim for tortious interference would fail.

Bellator also claims that the correspondence between itself and Alvarez’s representation constitute a privileged “pre-litigation correspondence” which New Jersey law recognizes.

As for the Breach of Contract claim, Bellator argues that it cannot discern which “contract” Alvarez claims to have been breached. It labels Alvarez breach of contract claim as devoid of a factual premise. It also adopts the “pre-litigation correspondence privilege” to this claim.

Eddie Alvarez’s attorneys have filed its opposition brief arguing that Bellator submitted its offer to Alvarez in bad faith. In its brief, it argues that Bellator knew that it had no intention or ability to perform the terms of the contract and it was done with the intent to prevent or obstruct Alvarez from signing with Zuffa.

Alvarez’s brief argues that much of the legal cases that Bellator cites in its Motion to Dismiss came at Summary Judgment rather than at a Motion to Dismiss. For those nonlawyers, Summary Judgment usually occurs after discovery (depositions, answering of written interrogatories, etc.) while a Motion to Dismiss occurs around the beginning of the lawsuit. At most times, a Motion to Dismiss happens before a party must file a response to allegations in a lawsuit.

Alvarez argues a similar premise to what went against him at the Preliminary Injunction hearing in January. Essentially, Alvarez argues that Bellator cannot have the Court assume that it would be able to perform the matching terms in the Offer to Alvarez until further discovery is performed in this case. At the Preliminary Injunction hearing, the Court deferred on ruling whether or not Bellator offer matched the Zuffa contract offer to Alvarez. Notably, whether Bellator would have a PPV with Alvarez as the headliner. Here, Alvarez argues that his Counterclaims cannot be dismissed because as the Court determined it cannot decide on whether Bellator could rightfully match Zuffa. Thus, in this Motion to Dismiss, the Court cannot decide on whether Bellator’s offer was not done in bad faith.

Alvarez also requests that the Court allow him to Amend his Counterclaims if the Court finds in favor of Bellator. Something like this is normal and the Court would likely allow him to at least bring a Motion to Amend his Counterclaims.

Payout Perspective:

Both sides make plausible arguments for and against Alvarez’s claims. Alvarez’s logic that the Court cannot determine whether or not Bellator submitted the matching offer in bad faith and thus his claim should not be dismissed is a nice bit of irony considering Alvarez’s legal team wanted the Court to determine that Bellator’s offer was not on par with Zuffa’s in their Preliminary Injunction hearing. Long story short, it’s likely that the litigation in this dispute will continue past Bellator’s Motion to Dismiss.

http://mmapayout.com/2013/04/bellator-files-motion-to-dismiss-in-alvarez-case-alvarez-responds/

The court should dismiss those claims. Bellator matched the contract Eddie turned over to them by the UFC so that counterclaim seems ridiculous.

not a good look for eddie

^Agreed. This could get dragged out for a long time. Eddie could be making cash right now instead of battling in court in a fight that he has a good chance of losing. This all just seems like a big waste of time.

Bellator Getting Closer to Resolving Contractual Issue with Eddie Alvarez

Bellator just wrapped Season 8, arguably their most successful to date. However, the organization’s ongoing legal dispute with former lightweight champ Eddie Alvarez has no immediate end in sight. Fortunately, it appears the relationship is a little less icy than it was a few months ago when Bellator intervened with Alvarez’s attempts to sign with the UFC.

According to a conversation between Rebellion Media and Bellator CEO Bjorn Rebney, the company’s chief spoke with Alvarez last week at Bellator 95 and felt the two would definitely be able to come to an agreement at some point soon given the personal interaction.

“Eddie and I had a very good relationship as two people working together in business for four years. When this situation kind of came apart, we had a bad relationship for a short period. It was a great to see Ed. I did get a chance to spend some time with him and talk.”

“(When you speak) your chances of getting something resolved pretty dramatically increase.”

“We were community and talking…and I hope it results in us getting this behind us. I’ve got to give and he’s got to give a little bit. Hopefully we can find that middle ground and make this thing stop.”

Check out the interview with Rebney below (Alvarez comments at the 8:55 mark):



http://www.fighters.com/04/07/bjorn-rebney-spoke-to-eddie-alvarez-at-bellator-9

^Hope they get this resolved quick. Just a big waste of time. Eddie is probably just hoping they sweeten the deal a little but how long does he plan to let this go on.

Sounds like Eddie Alvarez got bad advice from some lawyers, probably from a company that rhymes with Goofa.

nhbnews wrote:Sounds like Eddie Alvarez got bad advice from some lawyers, probably from a company that rhymes with Goofa.

Yup, that's what it's looking like.

Bellator files Reply Brief in Motion to Dismiss Alvarez’s claims

Bellator has filed its Reply Brief in support of its Motion to Dismiss Eddie Alvarez’s counterclaims. Bellator’s motion should be decided sometime this month.

Bellator’s counsel has requested an oral argument although its not known at this point whether the Court will grant this request.

The Reply Brief attacks Alvarez’s position in bringing its two counterclaims against Bellator for tortious interference and breach of contract. Notably, Bellator frames its argument to the Court by suggesting that there is not a case in the whole United States that allows a tortious interference or breach of contract claim where a party has attempted to match a matching rights clause in a contract. Bellator goes so far as using an exclamation point to highlight the fact that there is not one case in the United States supporting Alvarez’s theory. “To emphasize, we have not found one case in the United States!” states Bellator in its brief. An exclamation is a no-no in legal briefing. Its the equivalent of typing in all caps.

The brief supports the argument that Bellator had a legal, contractual right to proffer a contract to Alvarez to match Zuffa’s offer. Thus, Alvarez’s claims for “interfering” with his opportunity to obtain a contract from Zuffa and breach of the Bellator contract should be dismissed.

Bellator’s argument is that its submission of a matching offer does not give rise to a cause of action for tortious interference since Bellator claims its matching offer was not done with malice, a requirement it argues is needed to prove such a claim.

Moreover, it states that the communications between Bellator and Alvarez’s counsel in regard to Bellator’s efforts to match the contract offered to Alvarez by Zuffa are confidential communications. As a result, the Court should not consider it and therefore the claims must be dismissed.

Also of note in Belltor’s Reply is the argument that Alvarez’s cannot bring his Breach of Contract claim because the purported matching contract offered by Bellator to Alvarez has yet to be breached. The main argument by Alvarez is that Bellator cannot match the PPV terms as well as the platform (Spike vs. Fox).

Payout Perspective:

A very strong Reply Brief that seemed a bit too strong. Its rare to use an exclamation point in legal briefing. Its almost a faux pas to do so. The brief attempted to pick apart Alvarez’s opposition brief to the point of criticizing Alvarez’s attorneys. It appears that the issue will boil down to whether Bellator’s attempt to match Zuffa’s contract was proper. This might not be determined at this stage of the lawsuit. Of course, Alvarez’s attorneys have requested the Court an opportunity to amend its Counterclaims if they are found insufficient. Thus, we may not see the end of this lawsuit anytime soon.

http://mmapayout.com/2013/04/bellator-files-reply-brief-in-motion-to-dismiss-alvarezs-claims/

Bellator motion to dismiss Alvarez claim rejected

Remember in December when UFC president Dana White said the situation with Lightweight Eddie Alvarez and Bellator was "going to get ugly"? Well, that's what's happening now. The last update on the legal situation came after Alvarez was denied a preliminary injunction that would have allowed him to compete at UFC 159 on April 27.

Since then, the case has been continued twice while both parties discussed settlement options. Most recently, Bellator filed a motion to dismiss two items from Alvarez's counterclaim against the company: tortious interference and breach of contract. The two items are both essential to Alvarez's argument and their dismissal would most likely destroy his entire argument.

Fortunately for Eddie, Judge Jose L. Linares of the U.S. District court denied Bellator's motion. SI.com provides the quote from Judge Linares' decision:

"In deciding the instant motion to dismiss, this Court must accept allegations in Alvarez's counterclaim as true," wrote Judge Linares. "Accepting the validity of Bellator's argument would require this Court to make a factual determination that Bellator, in fact, had a legitimate business-related justification for proposing a contract to Alvarez purporting to match the Zuffa offer. It would be inappropriate for this Court to make a factual determination at this stage."

Basically, this just resets the case back to where it was originally. In response to both Alvarez's preliminary injunct and Bellator's motion to dismiss, Linares has refused to give premature determination of facts. So, the case will continue as set until future motions are filed or it goes to trial.

http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2013/4/18/4237346/bellators-motion-to-dismiss-eddie-alvarezs-claims-denied-by-judge

These Zombies often start their articles by paying homage to their Boss White.

"Fortunately for Eddie, Judge Jose L. Linares of the U.S. District court [sic] denied Bellator's motion" - so we know which side this web site is on in this suit.