Pick'em Leagues: THE BIG SHOW CASUAL BEST OF THE REST Single Event PvP: FANTASY POOLS Betting Leagues: THE BIG SHOW BEST OF THE REST

Nick Diaz Sues Nevada Athletic Commission, Claims Due Process Rights Violated

Print  
Posted By Message

grappler0000

MODular Approach

grappler0000 Avatar
25
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:10,142
Career:2,746-1,521
Joined:Mar 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
2,487
UFC welterweight Nick Diaz has filed a lawsuit against the Nevada State Athletic Commission (NSAC) for alleged violations of statutory law and his Constitutional rights to Due Process.

Diaz, acting through his lawyer Ross C. Goodman, filed it in Nevada on Tuesday, April 24th. Diaz's motion for a preliminary injunction was filed Thursday.

The lawsuit is related to a failed drug test by Diaz that was conducted by the NSAC. It was announced on Feb. 9th the Stockton, Calif. native tested positive for marijuana metabolites from a test administered after his UFC 143 bout with Carlos Condit. He was subsequently given a summary suspension by the NSAC.

The suit is asking the court to immediately stay the summary suspension handed out to Diaz by the NSAC as well as to enjoin the NSAC from going ahead in any further disciplinary proceedings. Diaz's complaint also asks the court to declare his due process rights have been violated by the NSAC's failure to promptly convene a hearing to determine the merits of the disciplinary complaint against him.

Diaz's suit centers on three allegations, two of which relate to statutory complaints for which he seeks injunctive relief -- namely, to have the temporary suspension lifted and to not be required to go any further punitive proceedings. The other allegation focuses on Diaz's due process rights, the NSAC's violation of which entitles Diaz to both injunctive and declaratory relief, according to the lawsuit...

Full Story

_______________________________________

Post #1   4/26/12 11:45:58PM   

george112

The Playground OG

george112 Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,316
Career:1,220-793
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: The Original Gangsters
Chips:
1,050

Posted by grappler0000

UFC welterweight Nick Diaz has filed a lawsuit against the Nevada State Athletic Commission (NSAC) for alleged violations of statutory law and his Constitutional rights to Due Process.

Diaz, acting through his lawyer Ross C. Goodman, filed it in Nevada on Tuesday, April 24th. Diaz's motion for a preliminary injunction was filed Thursday.

The lawsuit is related to a failed drug test by Diaz that was conducted by the NSAC. It was announced on Feb. 9th the Stockton, Calif. native tested positive for marijuana metabolites from a test administered after his UFC 143 bout with Carlos Condit. He was subsequently given a summary suspension by the NSAC.

The suit is asking the court to immediately stay the summary suspension handed out to Diaz by the NSAC as well as to enjoin the NSAC from going ahead in any further disciplinary proceedings. Diaz's complaint also asks the court to declare his due process rights have been violated by the NSAC's failure to promptly convene a hearing to determine the merits of the disciplinary complaint against him.

Diaz's suit centers on three allegations, two of which relate to statutory complaints for which he seeks injunctive relief -- namely, to have the temporary suspension lifted and to not be required to go any further punitive proceedings. The other allegation focuses on Diaz's due process rights, the NSAC's violation of which entitles Diaz to both injunctive and declaratory relief, according to the lawsuit...

Full Story



Seems like he may have a case.

_______________________________________
Ron Paul 2016

Post #2   4/27/12 12:01:22AM   

tcunningham

Combat Sport and Fitness

tcunningham Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,259
Career:508-351
Joined:Sep 2009
Chips:
637
he suing for 3 different reasons. he will probably only win one, but it's worth going after all three. he has the right and if he feels like his rights have been violated he can do that. i think the due process thing will probably get declined, i think the reason he's waited so long is that the NSAC has a lot of shit to do. i'm not trying to sound smart, it just seems like when people file lawsuits they generally like to sue for multiple things in hopes to at least get one of them.

_______________________________________

Post #3   4/27/12 2:10:45AM   

ncordless

MODulation

ncordless Avatar
12
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,843
Career:1,873-1,070
Joined:Apr 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
1,098
The Due Process one is interesting. It kind of flows from the statutory violations because they all relate to an unreasonable delay in a hearing following a pre-hearing deprivation of rights. Not an easy case to win. I can't say for sure, but depending on which due process rights they allege are being violated (Nevada Constitution due process or US Constitution 14th amendment due process) they may be using this claim to bounce the case up to federal court. You need a federal question or diversity (parties from different states) to get the case to the fed, and an unconstitutional-as-applied DPC claim would do the trick if for some reason diversity fails (can't see why it would as I assume Diaz is a resident of Cali, but the intricacies of the rules of diversity can be tricky). You don't always want to go to the feds, especially if you have a harder case to prove because the feds will throw that shit out, but if you are worried that the law is on your side but the state judge might get crazy with the cheese wiz, you are better off bouncing the state claims up to the feds because they have to follow the laws of the state are not supposed to create/expand state common law like the state judge might.
The statute saying he gets a hearing in 45 days seems like it has been violated based on how the article explains it, but I don't know the case law. The other statute violation is bit more of a stretch, but worth it.
You never know, NSAC might just withdraw the suspension and render the case moot rather than have a chance that a judge is going to tell them they can't do something anymore.

_______________________________________
Flame Not, Lest Ye Be Flamed Yourself.

Post #4   4/27/12 3:50:47AM   

scoozna

Liver shot!

scoozna Avatar
7
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,017
Career:2,244-1,261
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
599

Diaz's complaint also cites breach of statute NRS 467.117, which requires that a "temporary suspension may be made only where the action is necessary to protect the public welfare". In other words, Diaz's temporary suspension is unlawful because no basis has been established that demonstrates suspending Diaz was done as a matter of preserving public health.


While that seems like a legitimate argument, I always thought the ACs start the suspensions right away so the fighter's can get it over with as soon as possible...and it overlaps the post-fight period where they wouldn't be fighting anyway.

So, this may hold up, but I think it would end up working against a fighter who loses an appeal (as most do it seems).

_______________________________________
“I don’t know what kind of technique was used there, but there was a lot of kicking and punching.” Jim Brown

Post #5   4/27/12 9:53:01AM   

Wallass

MMA Sensei

Wallass Avatar
11
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,387
Career:2,218-1,306
Joined:Oct 2008
Camp: Canada's Finest
Chips:
295
This has somehow become more laughable then the Overeem case. Good thing Diaz didn't win that title!

Post #6   4/27/12 10:05:18AM   

grappler0000

MODular Approach

grappler0000 Avatar
25
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:10,142
Career:2,746-1,521
Joined:Mar 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
2,487

Posted by scoozna


Diaz's complaint also cites breach of statute NRS 467.117, which requires that a "temporary suspension may be made only where the action is necessary to protect the public welfare". In other words, Diaz's temporary suspension is unlawful because no basis has been established that demonstrates suspending Diaz was done as a matter of preserving public health.


While that seems like a legitimate argument, I always thought the ACs start the suspensions right away so the fighter's can get it over with as soon as possible...and it overlaps the post-fight period where they wouldn't be fighting anyway.

So, this may hold up, but I think it would end up working against a fighter who loses an appeal (as most do it seems).



They have the ability to tack on time-served without that measure, so I'm led to believe that the temporary suspensions probably get used so a fighter doesn't run out and fight while they are waiting for their trial. That would be more applicable outside the UFC, but I'm sure that's still probably the reasoning.

_______________________________________

Post #7   4/27/12 10:47:29AM   

Chael_Sonnen

Follow.The.Buzzards

Chael_Sonnen Avatar
6





 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,009
Career:1,277-785
Joined:May 2010
Chips:
1,409
Nick should employ Uber's mad scientist doctor to vouch for him.

_______________________________________
Mr. Playground
• 2010 - 2016 •

Post #8   4/27/12 10:48:51AM   

BigBadAl

In Full Mount

BigBadAl Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:721
Career:408-321
Joined:Jun 2009
Chips:
146
Does this mean Nick want's to fight again

Post #9   4/27/12 11:53:15AM   

grappler0000

MODular Approach

grappler0000 Avatar
25
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:10,142
Career:2,746-1,521
Joined:Mar 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
2,487

Posted by BigBadAl

Does this mean Nick want's to fight again



I think he'd rather take a break, but IMO it would benefit his case if he says he is ready to fight tomorrow.

_______________________________________

Post #10   4/27/12 12:48:37PM