Golden Boy and Guerrero flaunt the Court’s Decision
Los Angeles, Calif. (October 1, 2009) – -Directly contradicting the Court’s decision, Guerrero’s current team is once again interfering with Goossen Tutor Promotions contract with Robert Guerrero. Nothing in the Court’s decision stated it’s basis was merely because of a lack of Armando Garcia’s signature on the Arbitration Decision. Rather, the Court specifically found for Goossen Tutor Promotions on the grounds that the Arbitration award was obtained by “corruption, fraud, or other undue means.”
There is no court decision or binding arbitration award that has ever allowed Guerrero to sign with any promoter, including Golden Boy Promotions, while he remains under contract with Goossen Tutor.
Mr. Guerrero, his management, and the California State Athletic Commission (“CSAC”) all signed and approved Guerrero’s Promotional Agreement with Goossen Tutor Promotions, which allows for extensions of the five-year term due to injuries and other reasons. That contract remains valid, binding, enforceable and in effect and has not expired on its own terms.
Golden Boy and Guerrero are ignoring the Court’s Decision overturning CSAC’s Arbitration award, having decided on their own that Goossen Tutor’s contract with Guerrero has expired.
Guerrero’s counsel today went so far as to ask Deputy Attorney General Karen B. Chappelle to support Guerrero’s contract with Golden Boy over Goossen Tutor, completely ignoring Goossen Tutor’s legal rights. Ms. Chappelle and Deputy Attorney General Earl Plowman are the same legal advisors to the arbitrator who apparently orchestrated passing off their decision as that of the arbitrator, which resulted in the Court finding the Decision was procured through corruption, fraud or other undue means.
The Court’s Decision is binding on all parties, including Guerrero, CSAC, and Golden Boy. Goossen Tutor will take all appropriate steps to make sure ALL parties comply with the Court’s Decision.
Team Guerrero fired back with a counter hours later…
This afternoon Goossen-Tutor Promotions, LLC (“GTP”) issued a press release relating to Robert Guerrero, which misstates the relevant facts. In order to avoid all confusion, here are the facts relative to the dispute between Guerrero and GTP.
1. In March 2003, Guerrero and GTP entered into a promotional agreement which provided for a 5 year term commencing on May 4, 2003 (the GTP Promotional Agreement”).
2. All professional boxing promotional agreements executed in California must include the Commission-approved California Addendum.
3. The California Addendum expressly provides that no promotional agreement may exceed 5 years, and that the terms of the California Addendum control over any conflicting provision in the parties’ promotional agreement.
4. In March 2008, prior to the expiration of the 5 year maximum term for a promotional agreement, Guerrero commenced an arbitration before the California State Athletic Commission (the “Commission”) requesting that the GTP Promotional Agreement be terminated on numerous grounds, including substantial, repeated breaches by GTP.
5. Armando Garcia (“Garcia”) was appointed the arbitrator.
6. Two days of evidentiary hearings were held before Garcia.
7. In November 2008, Garcia announced that he had resigned as executive officer of the Commission.
8. On December 15, 2008, an arbitration award (the “Award”) was issued terminating the GTP Agreement. The grounds for termination were: (i) the maximum 5 year period for a promotional agreement had expired; (ii) GTP had failed to obtain a good faith offer of a bout for Guerrero for more than 4 consecutive months; (iii) GTP had failed to obtain the required number of fights for Guerrero as required by the GTP Agreement; (iv) GTP had failed to pay the Guerrero his contractually required minimum purses for his fights against Spend Abazi and Eric Aiken; and (v) GTP violated the Muhammad Ali Act by failing to provide financial disclosures to Guerrero in connection with his fight against Spend Abazi, and that GTP had taken money for such bout which rightfully belonged to Guerrero.
9. The Award was signed by Assistant Executive Director William Douglas “for Armando Garcia.”
10. On December 18, 2008, Guerrero entered into a promotional agreement (the “Golden Boy Agreement”) with Golden Boy Promotions, LLC (“Golden Boy”).
11. The California State Athletic Commission expressly approved the Golden Boy Agreement.
12. On March 25, 2009, GTP filed a petition to vacate the Award on the grounds that Garcia had not rendered the decision.
13. In July 2009, a deposition of Armando Garcia was held. In the morning, Garcia testified that he had not previously read the Award and that he had not reached a final decision in the arbitration.
14. During the afternoon of his deposition, Garcia testified: (i) he had reached tentative or interim decisions on the issues in the arbitration prior to leaving the Commission; (ii) the only difference between reaching a tentative decision and a final decision was that he had not seen the written Award; (iii) that he had now read the Award rendered against GTP, and that if the court concluded that he was still the Arbitrator, he would sign the Award with two minor, non-substantive changes.
15. Garcia further testified during the afternoon of his deposition that: (i) during the course of the arbitration, prior to the issuance of the Award, he had engaged in an ex parte telephone conversation with an employee of GTP where he told such employee that things were “probably going south” for GTP during the arbitration, which Garcia testified meant that GTP was probably going to lose the arbitration;[1] (ii) he intended to apply to be a judge or a referee in Nevada; (iii) one of the commissioners of the Nevada State Athletic Commission was a partner at the law firm which was acting as GTP’s local counsel in connection with the deposition; and (iv) the Nevada State Athletic Commission has the right to approve referees and judges in world title fights.
1 Standard 15(b) of California’s Ethics Standards For Neutral Arbitrators In Contractual Arbitration provides: “An arbitrator must not inform anyone of the award in advance of the time that the award is given to all parties.”
.
16. On September 29, 2009, the California Superior Court issued a minute order vacating the Award. The Award merely states “Petition GRANTED. California Code of Civil Procedure section 1286.2(a)(1).” The minute order contains no other findings, and contrary to the statements of GTP, the Court’s decision contains absolutely no reference to the GTP Agreement, and contains absolutely no finding that the GTP Agreement is valid or binding.
17. On October 1, 2009, Guerrero informed the California State Athletic Commission that: (i) since the maximum 5 year period for a promotional agreement had expired, there no longer exists any jurisdiction to conduct an arbitration between GTP and Guerrero; and (ii) pursuant to the Commission approved promotional agreement between Guerrero and Golden Boy, Golden Boy is the sole authorized promoter of Guerrero. Guerrero asked that the Commission confirm these facts.
18. On October 1, 2009, GTP issued its latest press release which states that : “There is no court decision or binding arbitration award that has ever allowed Guerrero to sign with any promoter, including Golden Boy Promotions, while he remains under contract with Goossen Tutor.”
19. Goossen Tutor’s press release fails to inform the reader that there is no court decision or binding arbitration award that has ever recognized that Guerrero is still bound to a contract with GTP. In fact, the GTP Agreement expired by its own terms in May 2008.
20. Guerrero is prepared to take all legal action necessary to prevent GTP or any other person from interfering with his Commission-approved promotional agreement with Golden Boy.