UFC’s $335 Million Agreement With Fighters Concerns Nevada Judge

A Nevada federal judge voiced concerns over some aspects of the Ultimate Fighting Championship’s $335 million settlement with fighters pursuing suppressed wages claims, according to a person familiar with the matter.

US District Judge Richard Boulware of the District of Nevada during a Friday status hearing on the proposed deal expressed concerns about the size of the settlement and whether one class of fighters may get materially less than a separate class pursuing similar claims, the person said.

Boulware asked for more information regarding payments to the fighters and ordered another status hearing June 28.

A UFC spokesperson declined to comment on the specifics of Friday’s hearing, calling the judge’s questions and feedback “part of the settlement review process.”

“As we have previously stated, a settlement was reached to the satisfaction of both parties,” the spokesperson said. “The parties will continue to advocate for the court’s ultimate approval of the settlement.”

TKO Group Holdings Inc., parent of the UFC mixed-martial arts league, said in March that it reached an agreement to end two class-action lawsuits with more than 1,000 UFC mixed-martial arts fighters. The deal came a month before the fighters, who were seeking $1.6 billion in damages, were set to take the Las Vegas-based professional fighting competition to trial.

Judges typically look at various factors when approving settlements, including the odds of plaintiffs and defendants winning a suit, the total amount awarded to consumers, attorneys’ fees, and how funds would be distributed.

The deal reached in March came nearly a decade after a group of MMA fighters first sued the UFC, alleging the company abused its market power over their labor and thereby depressed their wages.

The plaintiffs are represented by law firms including Berger Montague PC. UFC is represented by law firms including Paul Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP.

The cases are Le v. Zuffa, D. Nev., No. 2:15-cv-01045, 3/20/24 and Johnson v. Zuffa, D. Nev., No. 2:21-cv-01189, 6/14/2024.