[Previous entry: "Donna Duva-Brooks Named Matchmaker for Darwish Brothers Knockout Promotions"] [Main Index] [Next entry: "Landmark Boxing Website Merger To Take Place"]
12/09/2008 Archived Entry: "ABC Teleconference Minutes"
ABC for “objective and consistent written criteria for the ratings of professional boxers” 15 USC §6307c.(a) (see, “ABC Guidelines for Objective and Consistent Criteria for the Ratings of Professional Boxers”); however, most of the major sanctioning organizations have not adhered to this “sense of Congress.”]
Thus, the rating of boxers by a sanctioning organization is an integral part of its very existence; and, in the absence of such procedures, there does not appear to be any justification for a sanctioning organization to require a “sanctioning fee” from a boxer.
Nevertheless, whether or not a sanctioning organization has, as part of its rating criteria, a provision for “mandatory” boxing contests is within the discretion of a particular sanctioning organization and is not, otherwise, required by law. Of course, if a sanctioning organization does have such a provision, that provision (like all other rating criteria) should be consistently and equitably applied.
3. The regulation of boxing by representatives of the ABC in a jurisdiction that has its own boxing commission.
By letter dated 10/14/08, the Chairman of the newly-created and appointed Tennessee Athletic Commission requested the assistance of the ABC in “sanctioning and regulating” a proposed November 15, 2008 HBO event in Nashville featuring Jermaine Taylor and Jeff Lacy, promoted by DiBella Entertainment. Although the Federal Law authorizes representatives of the ABC to “supervise” boxing matches in jurisdictions without a boxing commission, this may occur only if there is no state (or tribal) boxing commission available to perform this function. 15 USC §6303. Further, even if this provision in the Federal Law were applicable to a jurisdiction with a boxing commission (albeit newly-created and appointed), there are significant concerns regarding liability protections for those ABC representatives lending such assistance. Indeed, the ABC has in place specific and detailed written criteria applicable to the regulation of boxing contests by ABC representatives in a jurisdiction without a boxing commission, including liability protection coverage for all such ABC representatives in the amount of $20 Million.
In light of the above, the ABC Legal Committee advises that, if a boxing commission in a particular jurisdiction, for whatever reason, is not capable of sanctioning and regulating certain boxing contests, the boxing commission should not agree to do so.
[Epilogue: This writer has been advised that, with the passage of its regulations on an “emergency basis,” the Tennessee Boxing Commission was able to “sanction and regulate” the event itself including the licensing of all participants, the selection of officials, and the weigh-in -- with Buddy Embanato, of the Louisiana Boxing Commission, being present to “answer any questions.”]
4. Regulation of boxing by representatives of the ABC in jurisdictions without a boxing commission.
A promoter was desirous of promoting a boxing show in South Dakota where there is no boxing commission. Although Scott LeDeaux, Chairman of the Minnesota Board of Boxing, had agreed to have the Minnesota Board of Boxing regulate the boxing show in South Dakota, the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office would not permit the same. The promoter then requested the ABC to send its representatives to South Dakota to regulate the boxing show. When told that the criteria promulgated by the ABC included the promoter securing a $20 Million liability policy as a protection for the ABC representatives who would be regulating the event (in the absence of any sovereign immunity protection), the promoter asserted that an insurance policy in such an amount was unattainable.
Considering the liability exposure attendant to an ABC representative regulating boxing outside the sovereign immunity protections of his/her own state or tribal jurisdiction, as well as the difficulty (if not impossibility) of a promoter securing a liability insurance policy in an amount that would provide the necessary protections, the ABC Legal Committee suggests that the ABC issue a “press release” declaring that, although authorized under Federal Law, its members will not assume the responsibilities and liabilities attendant to regulating boxing in a state or on tribal land that does not have its own boxing commission. In this manner, any “false hope” that a promoter can promote a boxing show in a jurisdiction without a boxing commission and secure adequate liability protection coverage to do so will be eliminated.
[Epilogue: The owner of the arena in South Dakota, where the boxing event was to take place, was able to secure a $20 Million liability policy at a cost of $31,000.00. As a result, Joe Mason, Executive Director, and the Colorado State Boxing Commission regulated the boxing contests in South Dakota (including the disqualification of a local boxer in the main event for punching his downed opponent, and the termination of another bout when a boxer fell through the ropes and dislocated his shoulder). The above notwithstanding, the President of the ABC reiterated the need for a “press release” declaring that ABC members will not regulate boxing in jurisdictions without a boxing commission.]
5. Failure of boxing commissions to report bout results, including suspensions, within 48 hours of the event.
It has come to the attention of the ABC that three different state boxing commissions recently failed to report the results of boxing matches and any related suspensions to Fight Fax within 48 hours of the event, as is required under the Federal Law (15 USC §6307). In addition to letters being sent to each of these offending boxing commissions by the President of the ABC regarding the consequences of their respective failures to adhere to the Federal Law, each of these matters will be referred to the ABC Disciplinary Committee for further action. The ABC Legal Committee will consider the possibility of having the ABC institute a law suit against one of its member commissions deemed to have violated the Federal Law in such a manner under the premise of “reckless endangerment”; providing the Disciplinary Committee with an additional measure in the array of potential actions it may take.
Old Business
1. Liability of an ABC member who “monitors” the actions of a boxing commission desirous of becoming a member of the ABC.
Dan Fitzgerald agreed to re-write a draft statute (or ordinance), to be adopted by a state or tribe desirous of becoming a member of the ABC, which grants to an ABC representative monitoring the activities of the boxing commission the same liability protections applicable to its own employees. Linda Acampora will assist in the drafting and review of such a provision.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce C. Spizler
Chair
NEXT MEETING – WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2008 AT 2:00 P.M. EST (postponed from November 19, 2008)
