In what will go down as one of the most interesting lawsuits ever filed ever, two people by the names Errol Spence and James Claim filed lawsuits against each at the same time. These two went to court on the same day each contradicting each other’s statements in the filed lawsuits.
Errol Spence Jr. filed a lawsuit in a Dallas lawsuit accusing his long term trainer Derrick James claiming that he does not owe Errol Spence any money. However, in an interesting twist of events, the accused who was Derrick James took his own lawsuit to court where he claimed that Errol owes him an amount of not less than $5 million which were verbally agreed upon by the two.
In the alleged agreement, James was supposed to pocket a 10% cut of the promised money to Spence in his bout agreements the proceeds James received from his pay per view proceeds. However, James denies all these claims by arguing that he only owed Spence only a 10% share of the money earned from the promoter contestant contract.
While James made claims that he was owed 10% of money earned from bout agreements and the pay per view proceeds, these claims are strongly refuted by Spence. Spence makes an argument claiming that he only owed James 10% share of the income from his promoter contestant contract.
What The Derrick James and Spence Lawsuit is All About
The lawsuit between Derrick James and Spence is one of the interesting lawsuits ever seen anywhere. The lawsuit which was filed by two people appearing to contradict each other’s lawsuit is one of its kinds; here are some details about the dispute.
Spence in his lawsuit claims that he trained James who was an amateur boxer which pushed him to go all the way to the semi-final of the 2012 Olympic Games in London. In the lawsuit, Spence claims that he had an agreement with James for a bonus of his but not all fights to emphasize the importance of his training input in James’s success.
However, a lot of these allegations were verbal which makes them somehow hard to prove in a court of law. According to Spence’s Attorney, there is no provision in the James Spence agreement stating that James was entitled to a 10% of Spence’s total fight revenue. Therefore, the lawyer argued that Spence was not supposed to pay James a sum totalling to 10% of Spence’s total generated income and pay per view from the boxing period in question.
Spence on his part claims that there was an agreement in place when he became a professional boxer back in 2012. He then adds that he paid James a sum of $250 from the first $2500 he earned in his fights. Spence claims that he continually paid James 10% of his earning from his entire contestant contract earning since that time.
Spence claims that as his earnings increased so did James’s earnings and therefore finds the unpaid demands by James somehow unfounded and lacking in merit.
