Will Nevada commission punish Chavez Jr and Hearn?

A Tuesday Court victory for the Nevada State Athletic Commission has cleared the way for them to punish fighter, Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. and potentially, Matchroom Boxing and promoter, Eddie Hearn.

Boxingscene.com’s Thomas Hauser was the first to report on Wednesday about the Nevada Commission winning both the motion to overturn Chavez’s temporary restraining order that allowed him to fight Daniel Jacobs last December in Phoenix and then, the motion to dismiss Chavez’s civil case completely:

Court Rules That The NSAC Can Proceed Against Chavez Jr https://t.co/Vr93qXEb6o pic.twitter.com/GpsLpJSNO2

— BoxingScene.com (@boxingscene) April 29, 2020

Clark County Judge Jim Crockett made his ruling after hearing arguments on a video conference from Nevada Deputy Attorney General, Edmund Magaw, on behalf of the athletic commission and Chavez’s Las Vegas attorney, Ross Goodman.

And, by eliminating the restraining order and dismissing Chavez’s case completely, the Nevada commission can now pursue disciplinary action against Chavez for having evaded a VADA drug test prior to the fight being originally scheduled to be held in Las Vegas last fall.

Chavez jr. the son of the Hall of Fame boxing legend, had won the TRO the week of the rescheduled fight for Phoenix in December. He went on to miss weight (by 5 lb.) the day before, was fined $1,000,000 of his purse and then, quit after five rounds against the former IBF Middleweight champ Jacobs.

As we wrote previously, the fight had been in jeopardy after Chavez was temporarily suspended November 20th by the NSAC for failing to take a pre-fight drug test in October. That was after a representative from the Voluntary Anti-Dopiing Administration (or VADA), showed up for a random sample at Chavez’s California Gym, and he refused.

When NSAC and Chairman Bob Bennett learned that Hearn was intending to ignore their suspension of Chavez in Nevada and simply move the fight to another state, he fired off a letter warning Hearn that he was potentially in violation of U.S. Federal Law for continuing to try to hold the fight elsewhere.

Further, Bennett warned that Hearn and Matchroom’s ability to be licensed to hold future fights in Nevada was being jeopardized, while the legal process was going on.

Here was part of that letter Bennett wrote obtained by the media,

“In addition, under the Ali Act, no boxer is permitted to box while under suspension from any boxing commission due to, among other things, failure of a drug test. Under Nevada law, an unarmed combatant that refuses to submit to the collection of a sample or specimen upon the request of the NSAC or its representative, or otherwise evades the collection thereof, has committed an anti-doping violation and is subject to disciplinary action just as he or she would be if he or she failed a drug test.

Based on Matchroom’s ongoing dealings with Chavez while he has been on suspension, it is apparent that Matchroom has violated Nevada law. Further, given that Chavez’s suspension is based on his refusal to submit to a drug test requested by the NSAC, and thus an anti-doping violation, it is apparent that the event scheduled to occur in Arizona on December 20, 2019, is in violation of the Ali Act.”

Also, add to the drama and legal wrangling that Nevada previously suspended Chavez and fined him $900,000 for flunking a post fight drug test in 2013, and  it’s a safe assumption that they’re about to “lower a similar boom” on him this time around.

The more juicy intrigue is: whether Bennett and the commission will follow through with the above written November threat that Hearn and Matchroom would be facing possible suspension of license to promote in Nevada?

And, if Nevada takes the step to revoke Hearn’s license in Nevada when boxing resumes, would the commission also take the step to ask other commissions in the United States to do the same thing for Hearn having ignored the Nevada ruling against Chavez?

That’s what Bennett was making clear, when the legal wrangling began last November.