Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Don King Productions, Inc. v. Douglas

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
742 F. Supp. 741 (1990)


Facts

Don King Productions, Inc. (DKP) (plaintiff) entered into a promotional agreement with boxer James “Buster” Douglas and his manager (defendants), under which DKP was to be the exclusive promoter for Douglas and arrange all of Douglas’s fights. DKP agreed to promote a heavyweight-championship fight involving Douglas. The agreement also allowed DKP to promote other professional boxers. DKP had a similar exclusive promotional agreement with heavyweight champion Mike Tyson. DKP arranged a fight between Douglas and Tyson in Tokyo in 1990. During the fight, Douglas was knocked down but got back up before the referee’s conclusion of a countdown. Don King of DKP believed that Douglas had benefited from an excessively long countdown by the referee. After Douglas was knocked down and got back up, King argued to the fight officials that the fight should be stopped due to the long countdown. Douglas went on to knock out Tyson. After the fight, King was seen arguing with a representative from a sanctioning body of the fight, the World Boxing Council, and implying that the outcome of the fight needed to be changed. King later told the press that the official videotape of the fight would irrefutably show that Douglas had been knocked out and that Tyson was the champion. DKP sued Douglas and his manager for breach of contract. DKP and Douglas both moved for summary judgment.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Sweet, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.