*UPDATE Gamboa to fight in July under a different promotional company

You got to ask SDSFinest!!!!!! He is the Lawyer in the house!

 

Just as long as he doesn't wind up back with Don King. :scaredas:

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

:good I hope everything turns out well for Gamboa. I can see Broner vs Gamboa in the future

 

I could try to break down the legal nuances of the situation, but I just don't know enough facts to apply the laws too. . .

I know that in regards to contracts, the courts will always look at the "four corners of the contract" first and foremost. . . Just meaning that whatever the contract stipulates, is valid. . . If the language is ambiguous, and somewhat subjective, then the court will simply look to the conduct, and the intent of the parties when they entered into the contract, and their subsequent behavior thereafter. . . What did the parties do? Was there any verbal agreements? What would a "reasonable person" (in the same or similar circumstances) believe based on their actions?

Here, it looks like Gamboa's behavior (if what TR says is true) was certainly indicative of being under a binding contract: Accepting the 75k, press statements talking about the fight, etc. . . From what I understand from Gamboa's lawyer, the fight with Rios is what was going to make his two-year extension official. . So they are arguing since they didn't ultimately "sign" to fight him, it's invalid. . . It's not that easy; verbal conduct, and actions like accepting money are very persuasive in court to show he accepted the terms of the new contract. But once again, I have NO IDEA what the facts are, so it's hard to tell.

As far as his German promotor, I'm clueless on how international law works. . . I don't know if it's binding in regards to him fighting in USA; I'm guessing it depends on the language of hte contract. I'm pretty sure that he could file an injunction in federal court, though, if he had a binding contract. Don't know, though. . .

 

Not sure about this. The court might find Gamboa has a right to a living and sort out the money later.

 

Gamboa could possibly argue that the 75K was a gift or a loan to be repaid rather than an advance from his prize money with Rios. I don't see Arum making such a mistake as to not put it in writing but if he didn't, well well well.......

 

How come two of Harvard lawyer's biggest money makers were able to get out of contracts with him with relative ease? Being a good lawyer isn't always about making airtight contracts, but rather relying on others ignorance of the law.

 

Probably on the check. But who knows? Again, I feel sorry for Gamboa getting mixed up with the likes of Onerous to start with. He just wasn't prepared for life outside Cuba. For all we know he signed his kids over to that creep without knowing it.

 

Eh, possibly. . . But when you look at it in the context of the situation (I'm sure there was some kind of verbal agreement made, or maybe even writing), it'd be pretty hard. . . The court uses the "reasonable person" standard when gauging ambiguous/subjective situations. . . They would argue that Arum, with his experience, and Gamboa with his experience on how contracts/advances work, they both had a "meeting of the minds" in regards to what the money was for.

But I woudl HOPE that Gamboa's lawyers are good enough to not burn the bridge with Arum unless they felt like they had something pretty solid. . . So it'll be interesting to see how it plays out. .

I just hope, and pray that Gamboa gets back in teh ring ASAP. . if it means sucking his pride up, and making peace with Arum, so be it. . If it means fighting under/with the help of Floyd, so be it. . .

 

They could just be leeches looking for income. Gamboa seems to have no defense against them. NONE!

 

ali act doesn't matter is its a contract signed in german.oner is dodgy so who knows what has going on, chaps a dumb don king

 

:happy:happy:happy

 

where the hell is the source for this?