Judge declines to intervene in Lewis-Grant fight
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The federal judge overseeing the IBF corruption trial declined to order the organisation to withdraw from the April 29 heavyweight bout between champion Britain's Lennox Lewis and Michael Grant.
The order was sought Monday by David Tua, the International Boxing Federation's top-ranked heavyweight contender, who believes he should have the next shot at the champion.
His January lawsuit is an outgrowth of the controversial draw between Lewis and Evander Holyfield in March 1999, and not directly related to the racketeering case brought against IBF founder Robert Lee Sr. by federal prosecutors.
Tua asserts that the IBF violated its own regulations by ruling that Lewis was not obligated to fight him until Nov. 13. That is a year after Lewis unified the heavyweight titles by defeating Holyfield in a rematch.
Lawyers for Lewis and the IBF argued against intervention, contending the judge should permit flexibility in how the group interprets its rules, and the conflicts that need to be resolved to bring about a fight that could unify the heavyweight titles of the three major sanctioning groups.
Tua maintains that because his bout against the IBF champion was delayed because of the rematch, it must occur sooner than Nov. 13.
U.S. District Judge John W. Bissell agreed that Tua's rights "have been somewhat abridged," and did not bar the New Zealander from seeking monetary damages at a later date. He ruled that Tua, at 27, has not been irreparably harmed by the delay.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments