Kerwin v. Cage Fury Fighting Championships

2015 WL 5092976 (2015)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
K
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Kerwin v. Cage Fury Fighting Championships

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
2015 WL 5092976 (2015)

Facts

Ryan Kerwin (plaintiff), the owner of Xtreme Caged Combat (Xtreme), filed an antitrust suit in federal district court against Rob Haydak (defendant) and Cage Fury Fighting Championships (CFFC) (defendant), alleging that Haydak and CFFC had conspired with certain mixed martial arts (MMA) promoters and various casinos (defendants) to prevent competitors, including Xtreme, from entering the MMA market in Philadelphia. During discovery, Kerwin sought information related to the defendants’ business agreements, non-compete agreements, relative market shares, and nature of their businesses. Kerwin also sought information related to CFFC’s roster of MMA fighters, fighter contracts, financial documents, profits, advertising materials and tickets, sponsor and employee lists, and videos of past MMA events. Finally, Kerwin sought the financial terms and contracts for every venue where CFFC had promoted an MMA event. Haydak and CFFC refused to provide the requested information. Kerwin moved to compel Haydak and CFFC to respond to specific interrogatories and requests for production of documents. Haydak and CFFC moved for a protective order to preclude them from having to respond to Kerwin’s requests, arguing that Kerwin sought the requested information to gain an unfair business advantage.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Stengel, J.)

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 802,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Civil Procedure

Key Terms

Related Videos