BoxRec

"Sulaiman also clarified the WBC's position as to what would happen once the Povetkin and Wilder lawsuit goes to trial, possibly as early as February barring a settlement.

"If Mr. Wilder prevails at that trial, the WBC shall afford Mr. Povetkin the opportunity to show that the trial's result was not based on a finding that Mr. Povetkin ingested meldonium after January 1, 2016," Sulaiman said. "If Mr. Povetkin fails to make that showing the WBC shall: (a) withdraw recognition of Povetkin as interim world champion (if he wins that title); (b) withdraw any mandatory challenger status he might have; and (c) impose any penalties upon Mr. Povetkin as per the WBC Clean Boxing Program protocol, which includes suspensions and fines.""

What has the WBC to do with this? It's even more evidence that Wilder and the WBC work together against Povetkin and his team.

Who is Riabinsky? Boxrec does not have this promoter. Is he vice-president of commission?

sandis wrote:Who is Riabinsky? Boxrec does not have this promoter. Is he vice-president of commission?

View http://www.espn.com.au/boxing/story/_/i ... tkin-fight

sandis wrote:Who is Riabinsky? Boxrec does not have this promoter. Is he vice-president of commission?

http://www.vsenabox.ru/

asdfjkl wrote:What has the WBC to do with this? It's even more evidence that Wilder and the WBC work together against Povetkin and his team.

Can't wait to see Povetkin getting revenge in court!

What right does the WBC have to use the outcome of a defamation and breach of contract lawsuit to determine the perceived guilt of an alleged PED user who has already been cleared of any accusations of wrongdoing by WADA and VADA, when the defendants' (Wilder) main defence is "rhetorical hyperbole"?

Surely there's no correlation between proving rhetorical hyperbole and irrefutable proof of PED use?

From a layman's perspective, it appears that the WBC have taken sides with Wilder by issuing threats to Povetkin, because (from what I can tell), they won't punish Deontay if he loses this lawsuit, but they are willing to punish Alexander.

Do we have any legally-trained forum users that can explain this?

apollo creed wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:What has the WBC to do with this? It's even more evidence that Wilder and the WBC work together against Povetkin and his team.

Can't wait to see Povetkin getting revenge in court!

He won't get anything but a bill.

The op didn't post the whole statement. Not a threat, just clarification on the interim title. Penalties should be stiffer for frivolous law suits. I'm sure wilder will just settle when they offer him a couple million before either hits court.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The op didn't post the whole statement. Not a threat, just clarification on the interim title. Penalties should be stiffer for frivolous law suits. I'm sure wilder will just settle when they offer him a couple million before either hits court.

It's not just about the 80 ish million for Povetkin, it's also because Wilder tries to destroy his name and a lot of dumb African American Wilder fans think that Povetkin actually did something wrong, while he didn't. Povetkin is a 100% innocent men, from the start.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The op didn't post the whole statement.

I read the whole statement from another source.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Not a threat, just clarification on the interim title.

The WBC issued a threat, because they detailed the punishments inflicted on Povetkin should Wilder’s legal team prevail in this litigation. In my mind, that’s a threat.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Penalties should be stiffer for frivolous law suits.

It was Ryabinsky, not Povetkin, that filed a lawsuit against Deontay Wilder. What has this got to do with the WBC? For this particular situation, the legal system should decide what is “frivolous” not the WBC.

If the lawsuit was indeed deemed to be “frivolous”, then Deontay Wilder’s legal representatives would not have failed in their motion to dismiss, which means that Ryabinsky’s lawsuit contains legitimate complaints that must be addressed in court.

And in legal terms, that has already been proven to be an irrefutable fact that no one can possibly deny!

In terms of my personal opinion though, there’s nothing frivolous about millions of dollars. Didn’t the WBC go bankrupt when they lost their lawsuit to Graciano Rocchigiani for sums similar to the amount that Ryabinsky is suing Wilder for?

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I'm sure wilder will just settle when they offer him a couple million before either hits court.

Have you read the lawsuit notes that I posted in this forum a few months ago? Ryabinsky’s case is extremely compelling, but as I’m no legal expert, I can’t say for certain that he’ll win this lawsuit.

I think this lawsuit will be settled, but my gut instinct tells me that Wilder will be the one paying Ryabinsky a few million dollars to make it go away.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The op didn't post the whole statement. Not a threat, just clarification on the interim title. Penalties should be stiffer for frivolous law suits. I'm sure wilder will just settle when they offer him a couple million before either hits court.

Agree. WBC want all the law suits BS out of the table.

Enlightened-One wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The op didn't post the whole statement.

I read the whole statement from another source.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Not a threat, just clarification on the interim title.

The WBC issued a threat, because they detailed the punishments inflicted on Povetkin should Wilder’s legal team prevail in this litigation. In my mind, that’s a threat.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Penalties should be stiffer for frivolous law suits.

It was Ryabinsky, not Povetkin, that filed a lawsuit against Deontay Wilder. What has this got to do with the WBC? For this particular situation, the legal system should decide what is “frivolous” not the WBC.

If the lawsuit was indeed deemed to be “frivolous”, then Deontay Wilder’s legal representatives would not have failed in their motion to dismiss, which means that Ryabinsky’s lawsuit contains legitimate complaints that must be addressed in court.

And in legal terms, that has already been proven to be an irrefutable fact that no one can possibly deny!

In terms of my personal opinion though, there’s nothing frivolous about millions of dollars. Didn’t the WBC go bankrupt when they lost their lawsuit to Graciano Rocchigiani for sums similar to the amount that Ryabinsky is suing Wilder for?

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I'm sure wilder will just settle when they offer him a couple million before either hits court.

Have you read the lawsuit notes that I posted in this forum a few months ago? Ryabinsky’s case is extremely compelling, but as I’m no legal expert, I can’t say for certain that he’ll win this lawsuit.

I think this lawsuit will be settled, but my gut instinct tells me that Wilder will be the one paying Ryabinsky a few million dollars to make it go away.

Actually it's Wilder\DiBella suit for contract breach for 5M and Povetkin\Riabinsky countersuit for defamation for crazy $$$.
Defamation is very hard to prove in court, contract breach is much easier....I don't know who represents Riabinsky, but Wilder guy is Judd Burstein...best litigator in Sport business.

bigman1968 wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The op didn't post the whole statement.

I read the whole statement from another source.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Not a threat, just clarification on the interim title.

The WBC issued a threat, because they detailed the punishments inflicted on Povetkin should Wilder’s legal team prevail in this litigation. In my mind, that’s a threat.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Penalties should be stiffer for frivolous law suits.

It was Ryabinsky, not Povetkin, that filed a lawsuit against Deontay Wilder. What has this got to do with the WBC? For this particular situation, the legal system should decide what is “frivolous” not the WBC.

If the lawsuit was indeed deemed to be “frivolous”, then Deontay Wilder’s legal representatives would not have failed in their motion to dismiss, which means that Ryabinsky’s lawsuit contains legitimate complaints that must be addressed in court.

And in legal terms, that has already been proven to be an irrefutable fact that no one can possibly deny!

In terms of my personal opinion though, there’s nothing frivolous about millions of dollars. Didn’t the WBC go bankrupt when they lost their lawsuit to Graciano Rocchigiani for sums similar to the amount that Ryabinsky is suing Wilder for?

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I'm sure wilder will just settle when they offer him a couple million before either hits court.

Have you read the lawsuit notes that I posted in this forum a few months ago? Ryabinsky’s case is extremely compelling, but as I’m no legal expert, I can’t say for certain that he’ll win this lawsuit.

I think this lawsuit will be settled, but my gut instinct tells me that Wilder will be the one paying Ryabinsky a few million dollars to make it go away.

Actually it's Wilder\DiBella suit for contract breach for 5M and Povetkin\Riabinsky countersuit for defamation for crazy $$$.
Defamation is very hard to prove in court, contract breach is much easier....I don't know who represents Riabinsky, but Wilder guy is Judd Burstein...best litigator in Sport business.

Andrey Ryabinskiy's attorney has already identified mistakes made by Wilder's legal representatives, when they failed to include a Pre-Motion Conference letter prior to filing their Motion to Dismiss, a misstep that they themselves conceded to (as per a letter written by Judd Burnstein, PC).

From what I’ve been reading, this was a fundamental mistake that may have been one of the factors that caused Wilder’s motion to dismiss to fail.

I think Arnold and Porter (Kent Yalowitz) represent Ryabinskiy, but I could be wrong.

Enlightened-One wrote:

bigman1968 wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:
I read the whole statement from another source.

The WBC issued a threat, because they detailed the punishments inflicted on Povetkin should Wilder’s legal team prevail in this litigation. In my mind, that’s a threat.

It was Ryabinsky, not Povetkin, that filed a lawsuit against Deontay Wilder. What has this got to do with the WBC? For this particular situation, the legal system should decide what is “frivolous” not the WBC.

If the lawsuit was indeed deemed to be “frivolous”, then Deontay Wilder’s legal representatives would not have failed in their motion to dismiss, which means that Ryabinsky’s lawsuit contains legitimate complaints that must be addressed in court.

And in legal terms, that has already been proven to be an irrefutable fact that no one can possibly deny!

In terms of my personal opinion though, there’s nothing frivolous about millions of dollars. Didn’t the WBC go bankrupt when they lost their lawsuit to Graciano Rocchigiani for sums similar to the amount that Ryabinsky is suing Wilder for?

Have you read the lawsuit notes that I posted in this forum a few months ago? Ryabinsky’s case is extremely compelling, but as I’m no legal expert, I can’t say for certain that he’ll win this lawsuit.

I think this lawsuit will be settled, but my gut instinct tells me that Wilder will be the one paying Ryabinsky a few million dollars to make it go away.

Actually it's Wilder\DiBella suit for contract breach for 5M and Povetkin\Riabinsky countersuit for defamation for crazy $$$.
Defamation is very hard to prove in court, contract breach is much easier....I don't know who represents Riabinsky, but Wilder guy is Judd Burstein...best litigator in Sport business.

Andrey Ryabinskiy's attorney has already identified mistakes made by Wilder's legal representatives, when they failed to include a Pre-Motion Conference letter prior to filing their Motion to Dismiss, a misstep that they themselves conceded to (as per a letter written by Judd Burnstein, PC).

From what I’ve been reading, this was a fundamental mistake that may have been one of the factors that caused Wilder’s motion to dismiss to fail.

I think Arnold and Porter (Kent Yalowitz) represent Ryabinskiy, but I could be wrong.

Some guys in suits will earn a lot of Wilder's and Povetkin's money without a single punch

Enlightened-One wrote:

bigman1968 wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:
I read the whole statement from another source.

The WBC issued a threat, because they detailed the punishments inflicted on Povetkin should Wilder’s legal team prevail in this litigation. In my mind, that’s a threat.

It was Ryabinsky, not Povetkin, that filed a lawsuit against Deontay Wilder. What has this got to do with the WBC? For this particular situation, the legal system should decide what is “frivolous” not the WBC.

If the lawsuit was indeed deemed to be “frivolous”, then Deontay Wilder’s legal representatives would not have failed in their motion to dismiss, which means that Ryabinsky’s lawsuit contains legitimate complaints that must be addressed in court.

And in legal terms, that has already been proven to be an irrefutable fact that no one can possibly deny!

In terms of my personal opinion though, there’s nothing frivolous about millions of dollars. Didn’t the WBC go bankrupt when they lost their lawsuit to Graciano Rocchigiani for sums similar to the amount that Ryabinsky is suing Wilder for?

Have you read the lawsuit notes that I posted in this forum a few months ago? Ryabinsky’s case is extremely compelling, but as I’m no legal expert, I can’t say for certain that he’ll win this lawsuit.

I think this lawsuit will be settled, but my gut instinct tells me that Wilder will be the one paying Ryabinsky a few million dollars to make it go away.

Actually it's Wilder\DiBella suit for contract breach for 5M and Povetkin\Riabinsky countersuit for defamation for crazy $$$.
Defamation is very hard to prove in court, contract breach is much easier....I don't know who represents Riabinsky, but Wilder guy is Judd Burstein...best litigator in Sport business.

Andrey Ryabinskiy's attorney has already identified mistakes made by Wilder's legal representatives, when they failed to include a Pre-Motion Conference letter prior to filing their Motion to Dismiss, a misstep that they themselves conceded to (as per a letter written by Judd Burnstein, PC).

From what I’ve been reading, this was a fundamental mistake that may have been one of the factors that caused Wilder’s motion to dismiss to fail.

I think Arnold and Porter (Kent Yalowitz) represent Ryabinskiy, but I could be wrong.

That's Riabinski's attorney:
http://forwardlegal.ru/en/team/person/# ... kondrateva

According to this: http://www.boxingnews24.com/2016/06/wor ... -34-5-mln/

asdfjkl wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The op didn't post the whole statement. Not a threat, just clarification on the interim title. Penalties should be stiffer for frivolous law suits. I'm sure wilder will just settle when they offer him a couple million before either hits court.

It's not just about the 80 ish million for Povetkin, it's also because Wilder tries to destroy his name and a lot of dumb African American Wilder fans think that Povetkin actually did something wrong, while he didn't. Povetkin is a 100% innocent men, from the start.

Do you wake up with race related thoughts in your head or is there like an e-mail list to join that has a racist verse of the day type thing?

bigman1968 wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

bigman1968 wrote:
Actually it's Wilder\DiBella suit for contract breach for 5M and Povetkin\Riabinsky countersuit for defamation for crazy $$$.
Defamation is very hard to prove in court, contract breach is much easier....I don't know who represents Riabinsky, but Wilder guy is Judd Burstein...best litigator in Sport business.

Andrey Ryabinskiy's attorney has already identified mistakes made by Wilder's legal representatives, when they failed to include a Pre-Motion Conference letter prior to filing their Motion to Dismiss, a misstep that they themselves conceded to (as per a letter written by Judd Burnstein, PC).

From what I’ve been reading, this was a fundamental mistake that may have been one of the factors that caused Wilder’s motion to dismiss to fail.

I think Arnold and Porter (Kent Yalowitz) represent Ryabinskiy, but I could be wrong.

That's Riabinski's attorney:
http://forwardlegal.ru/en/team/person/# ... kondrateva

According to this: http://www.boxingnews24.com/2016/06/wor ... -34-5-mln/

Please have a look at my words you quoted and then read the following:

Povetkin et al is represented by Kent A. Yalowitz and Tanya E. Kalivas of Arnold & Porter LLP.
Wilder is represented by Judd Burstein and Peter B. Schalk of Judd Burstein PC.

Enlightened-One wrote:

bigman1968 wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: Andrey Ryabinskiy's attorney has already identified mistakes made by Wilder's legal representatives, when they failed to include a Pre-Motion Conference letter prior to filing their Motion to Dismiss, a misstep that they themselves conceded to (as per a letter written by Judd Burnstein, PC).

From what I’ve been reading, this was a fundamental mistake that may have been one of the factors that caused Wilder’s motion to dismiss to fail.

I think Arnold and Porter (Kent Yalowitz) represent Ryabinskiy, but I could be wrong.

That's Riabinski's attorney:
http://forwardlegal.ru/en/team/person/# ... kondrateva

According to this: http://www.boxingnews24.com/2016/06/wor ... -34-5-mln/

Please have a look at my words you quoted and then read the following:

Povetkin et al is represented by Kent A. Yalowitz and Tanya E. Kalivas of Arnold & Porter LLP.
Wilder is represented by Judd Burstein and Peter B. Schalk of Judd Burstein PC.

But admit that the Russian attorney looks better than others

bigman1968 wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

bigman1968 wrote:
That's Riabinski's attorney:
http://forwardlegal.ru/en/team/person/# ... kondrateva

According to this: http://www.boxingnews24.com/2016/06/wor ... -34-5-mln/

Please have a look at my words you quoted and then read the following:

Povetkin et al is represented by Kent A. Yalowitz and Tanya E. Kalivas of Arnold & Porter LLP.
Wilder is represented by Judd Burstein and Peter B. Schalk of Judd Burstein PC.

But admit that the Russian attorney looks better than others

You could be right for all I know. I'm utterly clueless of legal matters such as this.

Wilder has a great case considering the legal precedent was set by ryabinsky. Povetkin has nothing but a threat and a hope that the legitimate suit gets dropped.

bigman1968 wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The op didn't post the whole statement.

I read the whole statement from another source.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Not a threat, just clarification on the interim title.

The WBC issued a threat, because they detailed the punishments inflicted on Povetkin should Wilder’s legal team prevail in this litigation. In my mind, that’s a threat.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Penalties should be stiffer for frivolous law suits.

It was Ryabinsky, not Povetkin, that filed a lawsuit against Deontay Wilder. What has this got to do with the WBC? For this particular situation, the legal system should decide what is “frivolous” not the WBC.

If the lawsuit was indeed deemed to be “frivolous”, then Deontay Wilder’s legal representatives would not have failed in their motion to dismiss, which means that Ryabinsky’s lawsuit contains legitimate complaints that must be addressed in court.

And in legal terms, that has already been proven to be an irrefutable fact that no one can possibly deny!

In terms of my personal opinion though, there’s nothing frivolous about millions of dollars. Didn’t the WBC go bankrupt when they lost their lawsuit to Graciano Rocchigiani for sums similar to the amount that Ryabinsky is suing Wilder for?

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I'm sure wilder will just settle when they offer him a couple million before either hits court.

Have you read the lawsuit notes that I posted in this forum a few months ago? Ryabinsky’s case is extremely compelling, but as I’m no legal expert, I can’t say for certain that he’ll win this lawsuit.

I think this lawsuit will be settled, but my gut instinct tells me that Wilder will be the one paying Ryabinsky a few million dollars to make it go away.

Actually it's Wilder\DiBella suit for contract breach for 5M and Povetkin\Riabinsky countersuit for defamation for crazy $$$.
Defamation is very hard to prove in court, contract breach is much easier....I don't know who represents Riabinsky, but Wilder guy is Judd Burstein...best litigator in Sport business.

Well, actually it's Ryabinski who allready said he was planning to suit Wilder and then Wilder countersuited him while Ryabinski prepared his case and like allways, kept his word.

asdfjkl wrote:

bigman1968 wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:
I read the whole statement from another source.

The WBC issued a threat, because they detailed the punishments inflicted on Povetkin should Wilder’s legal team prevail in this litigation. In my mind, that’s a threat.

It was Ryabinsky, not Povetkin, that filed a lawsuit against Deontay Wilder. What has this got to do with the WBC? For this particular situation, the legal system should decide what is “frivolous” not the WBC.

If the lawsuit was indeed deemed to be “frivolous”, then Deontay Wilder’s legal representatives would not have failed in their motion to dismiss, which means that Ryabinsky’s lawsuit contains legitimate complaints that must be addressed in court.

And in legal terms, that has already been proven to be an irrefutable fact that no one can possibly deny!

In terms of my personal opinion though, there’s nothing frivolous about millions of dollars. Didn’t the WBC go bankrupt when they lost their lawsuit to Graciano Rocchigiani for sums similar to the amount that Ryabinsky is suing Wilder for?

Have you read the lawsuit notes that I posted in this forum a few months ago? Ryabinsky’s case is extremely compelling, but as I’m no legal expert, I can’t say for certain that he’ll win this lawsuit.

I think this lawsuit will be settled, but my gut instinct tells me that Wilder will be the one paying Ryabinsky a few million dollars to make it go away.

Actually it's Wilder\DiBella suit for contract breach for 5M and Povetkin\Riabinsky countersuit for defamation for crazy $$$.
Defamation is very hard to prove in court, contract breach is much easier....I don't know who represents Riabinsky, but Wilder guy is Judd Burstein...best litigator in Sport business.

Well, actually it's Ryabinski who allready said he was planning to suit Wilder and then Wilder countersuited him while Ryabinski prepared his case and like allways, kept his word.

Team Wilder had previously filed his suit for $5 million two weeks before Andrey Ryabinsky filed the $34.5 million dollar lawsuit against Deontay.

Review the facts again and let me know if this leads you to revise your theory.

SFW wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The op didn't post the whole statement. Not a threat, just clarification on the interim title. Penalties should be stiffer for frivolous law suits. I'm sure wilder will just settle when they offer him a couple million before either hits court.

It's not just about the 80 ish million for Povetkin, it's also because Wilder tries to destroy his name and a lot of dumb African American Wilder fans think that Povetkin actually did something wrong, while he didn't. Povetkin is a 100% innocent men, from the start.

Do you wake up with race related thoughts in your head or is there like an e-mail list to join that has a racist verse of the day type thing?

His racist comments are enough for a lifetime ban from this forum.
He's by far the most useless poster on this site

Enlightened-One wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:

bigman1968 wrote:
Actually it's Wilder\DiBella suit for contract breach for 5M and Povetkin\Riabinsky countersuit for defamation for crazy $$$.
Defamation is very hard to prove in court, contract breach is much easier....I don't know who represents Riabinsky, but Wilder guy is Judd Burstein...best litigator in Sport business.

Well, actually it's Ryabinski who allready said he was planning to suit Wilder and then Wilder countersuited him while Ryabinski prepared his case and like allways, kept his word.

Team Wilder had previously filed his suit for $5 million two weeks before Andrey Ryabinsky filed the $34.5 million dollar lawsuit against Deontay.

Review the facts again and let me know if this leads you to revise your theory.

Don't confuse ajfuck with facts...his tongue so deep in Riabinsky's ass that are really hope for him he is getting paid, at least-))))