Brock Lesnar Files Suit Against WWE

[Dimensions 0]

According to several sources, Brock Lesnar's lawsuit filed against WWE today states that they are preventing him from wrestling, which he considers his main career. He signed a no compete clause last year following WrestleMania after he opted out of his contract due to the tough travel.

 

After leaving WWE, Lesnar made the practice squad for Minnesota Vikings. That quickly soured and there has been no contact between the two since the season began.

 

We're told that his no compete clause that he signed prevents him from working for any competitor or anything related to wrestling. (i.e. UFC, Pride). We're told that, and this is a legit date, his no compete cause ends on June 30, 2010. WWE's no compete clause includes all countries outside the US as well.

 

This is going to be one to follow.

 

Source: Torch/Wrestlezone.com

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

I can't see WWE being insane enough to put Lesnar under a no-compete clause for that length of time. It would never stand up in court.

[Guest Just Looking]

He signed the clause, so I don't see where he has a leg to stand on.

 

Plus, doesn't it expire in a little over a month?

[Guest JRE]

...So why'd he sign it?

[NoCalMike 0]

Pride/UFC related to wrestling? WTF....maybe slightly but not enough to hold up in court I bet.

[Guest Trivia247]

This seems to be the same standardized contractual obligation that all wrestlers of the WWE especially established name brand talent get if or when they do up and leave the company..

 

WCW had it on their wrestlers though they specified not going to the WWF at all during that durational period but they can go to other promotions, which half of those who went to WWF first made a stop in ECW until the contract timelimit lapsed.

 

WWE's much more broader yes but hell Brock didn't get cheated swindled or anything else, he signed the same thing everyone else signed. this bitching and moaning just caused him to take 5 big steps from ever returning to the WWE even if he wanted to in my book

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I luv Lesnar. Let him go WWE. Let him go.

 

 

... Let him go to PRIDE.

[The Decemberists 0]

I guess if Lesnar wins that would be the end of any no compete clauses?

 

If only TNA could get a grip on themselves this could end up being pretty interesting.

 

Unless Vince decides never to release anyone at all anymore and just keep everyone under contract untill it expires.

[Guest Ronnie755]

I think the deal with no compete clauses is this whenever they release somebody. They can't work for someplace like TNA for 90 days, but they still get paid. I think the workers have to agree to these clauses. From what I heard, Raven was able to immediately debut for TNA because he turned down the clause.

[humongous2002 0]

Lesnar is the stupidest moron that has ever walked out of a million dollars WWE contract just so he could get a very slim chance to play football in the NFL, he deserves nothing but bad luck.

[Ace309 0]

My understanding, which I unfortunately can't find a cite to back up at the moment, is that a noncompetition clause is valid unless the court it's being tried in finds it unconscionable (law talk for "oogy"). In Raimonde v. Van Vlerah (1975), 42 Ohio St.2d 21, 71 O.O.2d 12, 325 N.E.2d 544, an Ohio court says that "A noncompetition clause is reasonable if the restraint is no greater than necessary for the protection of the employer, does not place undue hardship on the employee, and is not injurious to the public." Assuming for the sake of argument that this is reasonably consistent with whatever jurisdiction's laws apply under Lesnar's contract with WWE (which I'm doing because I can't be arsed to do real research for this, although it's a complex and highly relevant issue), the 2010 date isn't necessarily greater than is necessary to protect WWE, and it's not injurious to the public, but it could be argued that a young'n like Lesnar would face undue hardship losing five prime years for his image. Of course, you'd also face the argument that a lot of wrestlers have made money after age 30, and I'd expect judges who aren't smarky about wrestling to be swayed by examples like Hogan and Flair still going hard well past the age Lesnar will be in 2010. The article linked below indicates one to two years as points where the clauses start to be looked at seriously as unenforceable.

 

This article on non-compete clauses in Georgia raises a few issues. (Again with the no-real-research caveat.) Consideration isn't a problem, since releasing Lesnar from his obligations would reasonably be called the quid for the noncompete clause's quo.

 

The scope issue is generally inoffensive when it comes to other worked promotions, since McMahon is limiting Lesnar from his exact duties in WWE. When it comes to MMA promotions, it might raise some eyebrows as overly broad because actual fighting wasn't part of his job in WWE and it might be considered an unreasonable limitation, but again, Vince has a business interest in protecting himself.

 

The territorial restriction might bite Vince in the ass as unreasonable or overly broad, considering that Japan isn't really a bona fide competitor to WWE in the United States.

 

A couple more articles here.

 

Working only with this vague sense - I'm not a lawyer, after all - I'd say that this will probably get blue-pencilled down to two or three years from the date of his release, possibly with MMA and/or promotions that market primarily to Japan taken out of the picture entirely. If the restrictions stay in effect and only the time gets shaved, Vince will still achieve his objective of keeping Lesnar as his exclusive property until he more or less disappears from the casual fans' consciousness.

 

Alternatively, they might look at other clauses - someone mentioned the 90-day standard clause - and impose that instead under good-for-the-goose reasoning.

 

I guess if Lesnar wins that would be the end of any no compete clauses?

 

Only ones that are unreasonable according to the court's findings. Vince's team would likely draft a new standard clause to conform to the outer boundaries of the decision.

 

I think the deal with no compete clauses is this whenever they release somebody. They can't work for someplace like TNA for 90 days, but they still get paid.

 

Different situation. Lesnar's not still being paid, to my knowledge. If WWE's still paying him his downside, then the court's most likely going to reason that he's being paid for doing nothing and give the case the old heave-ho on the thinking that he's making the money he'd make somewhere else just for hanging out.

[Guest CronoT]

Different situation. Lesnar's not still being paid, to my knowledge. If WWE's still paying him his downside, then the court's most likely going to reason that he's being paid for doing nothing and give the case the old heave-ho on the thinking that he's making the money he'd make somewhere else just for hanging out.

IF Lesnar is still getting paid a stipend, then the case will probably get thrown out of court. But, if Lesnar is not receiving any pay from Vince, except for contractually agreed upon merchandise royalties, then Vince will probably be ordered to reduce the length and scope of his No-Compete Clause on Lesnar.

 

Five years is a long time, and that would definitely harm Lesnar's ability to make a living.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Lesnar is the stupidest moron that has ever walked out of a million dollars WWE contract just so he could get a very slim chance to play football in the NFL, he deserves nothing but bad luck.

What an idiot he was for wanting to follow his dream. Damn the man for having a dream and wanting to follow it. Damn him, I say.

[Taker666 0]

What an idiot he was for wanting to follow his dream. Damn the man for having a dream and wanting to follow it. Damn him, I say.

If his dream was to play in the NFL, than why the hell did he join the WWE in the first place if his true passion is with football?

 

Brock Lesnar is a moron. nuff said.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

What an idiot he was for wanting to follow his dream. Damn the man for having a dream and wanting to follow it. Damn him, I say.

If his dream was to play in the NFL, than why the hell did he join the WWE in the first place if his true passion is with football?

 

Brock Lesnar is a moron. nuff said.

If his dream was to play in the NFL, than why the hell did he join the WWE in the first place if his true passion is with football?

 

It was a dream. not his sole dream. He just didn't want to look back in 20-years, and wonder what would have happened if he tried to make it in the NFL.

 

Brock Lesnar is a moron. nuff said

 

No, you're the moron.

[Guest pinnacleofallthingsmanly]

So he signed the no-compete clause after he decided he didn't want to wrestle anymore? If so, that was dumb.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

So he signed the no-compete clause after he decided he didn't want to wrestle anymore? If so, that was dumb.

How was it dumb when it was likely the only way Vince would let him out of the contract ?

[SuperJerk 0]

What an idiot he was for wanting to follow his dream. Damn the man for having a dream and wanting to follow it. Damn him, I say.

If his dream was to play in the NFL, than why the hell did he join the WWE in the first place if his true passion is with football?

I concur.

 

Brock's true passion was football about as much as my true passion is figure skating.

He didn't play it in college, and he turned down a chance to play it after college.

 

He never really wanted to play football, he just wanted a way to make a lot of money besides wrestling.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Brock's true passion was football about as much as my true passion is figure skating.

He didn't play it in college, and he turned down a chance to play it after college.

Congratulations on missing the point. It was one of his dreams to play in the NFL. After peaking in wrestling, he felt he should give it a shot, so he wouldn't look back and wonder, "What if".

[Guest pinnacleofallthingsmanly]

So he signed the no-compete clause after he decided he didn't want to wrestle anymore? If so, that was dumb.

How was it dumb when it was likely the only way Vince would let him out of the contract ?

What would the repurcussions have been had he just refused to go to the shows he was supposed to go to?

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

So he signed the no-compete clause after he decided he didn't want to wrestle anymore? If so, that was dumb.

How was it dumb when it was likely the only way Vince would let him out of the contract ?

What would the repurcussions have been had he just refused to go to the shows he was supposed to go to?

He'd have been sued for breach of contract, and would have gotten no money from Vince, and been forced to sit out the rest of his contract while the lawsuit went on.

[SuperJerk 0]

Brock's true passion was football about as much as my true passion is figure skating.

He didn't play it in college, and he turned down a chance to play it after college.

Congratulations on missing the point. It was one of his dreams to play in the NFL. After peaking in wrestling, he felt he should give it a shot, so he wouldn't look back and wonder, "What if".

No, I got the point that YOU missed, and that's Brock only wanted to do football because he was tired of wrestling and thought he might be good at it. That doesn't say "dream" to me, that says "missed opportunity".

 

Look, I don't agree with how Vince is screwing him over, and I have no clue when the non-compete clause was signed. I'm just saying that the word "dream", as it has been attached to his desire to play football, is a gross overstatement.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Brock's true passion was football about as much as my true passion is figure skating.

He didn't play it in college, and he turned down a chance to play it after college.

Congratulations on missing the point. It was one of his dreams to play in the NFL. After peaking in wrestling, he felt he should give it a shot, so he wouldn't look back and wonder, "What if".

No, I got the point that YOU missed, and that's Brock only wanted to do football because he was tired of wrestling and thought he might be good at it. That doesn't say "dream" to me, that says "missed opportunity".

 

Look, I don't agree with how Vince is screwing him over, and I have no clue when the non-compete clause was signed. I'm just saying that the word "dream", as it has been attached to his desire to play football, is a gross overstatement.

No, I got the point that YOU missed, and that's Brock only wanted to do football because he was tired of wrestling and thought he might be good at it.  That doesn't say "dream" to me, that says "missed opportunity".

 

Brock has long had ambitions of playing pro football. He'd peaked at wrestling, in his mind, and decided that this was the best time to try and see if he could make it in the NFL.

 

I'm just saying that the word "dream", as it has been attached to his desire to play football, is a gross overstatement.

 

If the NFL had offered him the same kind of money in 2000 that Vince did, he'd have taken them up on it. Back in 2000,he wasn't in the financial position to try for the NFL. After being in WWE for 3 years, he was in the financial position.

[NYU 0]

Lesnar is the stupidest moron that has ever walked out of a million dollars WWE contract just so he could get a very slim chance to play football in the NFL, he deserves nothing but bad luck.

What an idiot he was for wanting to follow his dream. Damn the man for having a dream and wanting to follow it. Damn him, I say.

This is a runabout conversation, and it always degenerates into exactly the same argument.

 

Someone is inevitably going to say that Brock Lesnar ran out on a company that desperately needed him as a top heel on Smackdown at the time. Someone will then return that claim by screaming that Lesnar had to face Hardcore Holly for the title only two months before, and was only going to get squashed by the Undertaker in a few months -- despite the fact that we have no solid idea of what WWE's plans were for the upcoming Lesnar/Taker feud.

 

Someone will say that Lesnar is an asshole for leaving WWE to try and start a career in the NFL. There will be someone else that says Brock was merely trying to follow his dream, and he shouldn't be blamed for trying to see if he could find success in another field. Then, we will see the counter to that argument when a new addition to the conversation says Brock should have never signed such an extended contract anyway if he eventually had plans to try his luck in professional football. If you're allowed to leave your contract on a whim to try a completely different career, then what exactly is the purpose of a contract anyway?

 

Someone will say they don't care to see Brock back in WWE since he doesn't even love professional wrestling anyway. Another person will say love for the sport has nothing to do with success. As long as Brock can still put on a good show, he should be welcomed. To return that claim, someone will simply cite the name "Goldberg." They will be told this is a completely different situation. The conversation will go around and around. Eventually, the discussion will become heated with people throwing out such barbaric insults like "jerk", "moron", and "idiot." And, in the end, it will just be a rehash of the other thousands of Brock Lesnar threads we've seen around these parts.

 

These would be reruns if they weren't already new episodes.

 

Simply put, if the contract says that the no-compete clause is to last until 2010, and Brock Lesnar signed that contract knowing exactly what the stipulation was, he should be forced to stick by it. If that was always to be the deal, then I don't see what there is to discuss. It's a shame he shot himself in the foot by signing such a contract, but you live and learn.

[humongous2002 0]

Blowing off a guarantee WWE million dollar contract for a so-called dream is just plain retarded, the guy had his own airplane for crying out loud thanks to WWE. This is like King James quitting the NBA to follow his dream of flipping burgers at McDonalds.

[Guest pinnacleofallthingsmanly]

Simply put, if the contract says that the no-compete clause is to last until 2010, and Brock Lesnar signed that contract knowing exactly what the stipulation was, he should be forced to stick by it. If that was always to be the deal, then I don't see what there is to discuss. It's a shame he shot himself in the foot by signing such a contract, but you live and learn.

 

I say he's dumb for just signing it. He should have had a lwayer look at it first instead of agreeing to it and then saying that it's unfair now.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Blowing off a guarantee WWE million dollar contract for a so-called dream is just plain retarded.

If you felt you were able to follow a dream you had, would you ?

[humongous2002 0]

Blowing off a guarantee WWE million dollar contract for a so-called dream is just plain retarded.

If you felt you were able to follow a dream you had, would you ?

If I was 100% sure that I was able to make my NFL dream come true and I didn't have a million dollar contract with my own plane, then my answer is yes.

[SuperJerk 0]

Brock has long had ambitions of playing pro football. He'd peaked at wrestling, in his mind, and decided that this was the best time to try and see if he could make it in the NFL.

If this is Lesnar's rationale, he's as dumb as everyone here is saying. The best time for him to get into the NFL would have been when he was 22. If playing for the NFL was really his "dream", that's what he should have done.

 

If the NFL had offered him the same kind of money in 2000 that Vince did, he'd have taken them up on it. Back in 2000,he wasn't in the financial position to try for the NFL. After being in WWE for 3 years, he was in the financial position.

 

My first job out of college paid barely $20,000 a year. I doubt the financial position the NFL would have put him in was that bad.

 

Reports at the time estimated he had little money left at the end of his WWE run.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Lesnar vs. Fedor.

 

Do it.