On March 22, 2018, World Wrestling Entertainment Inc. (WWE) sought the support of a federal court to uphold a sanctions recommendation provided a month earlier, which was directed toward attorney Konstantine Kyros. As we have previously covered, Kyros represents former WWE wrestlers, Evan Singleton and Vito LoGrasso, in their concussion suit against WWE.
The recommendation for sanctions stemmed from Kyros’ failure to adequately respond to interrogatories amid discovery. WWE believes that the suggested sanctions, to include attorneys’ fees and costs covering the ongoing discovery battle, appropriately respond to Kyros’ refusal to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Despite being given more than one opportunity to amend his deficient responses, he did not, and is now asserting that he withheld responses because he simply did not like the way the questions were worded.
WWE’s March 22, 2018 motion quoted Kyros as objecting to the recommended sanctions on the basis that the “Court-adopted language created by the opposing party [was] inherently prejudicial and [ ] an abuse of discretion.” Noting that counsel’s objection was unaccompanied by any authority that might provide him with a legal basis, WWE stated that “Kyros’ position means that any litigant could unilaterally decide not to comply with a court order if they subjectively believe that such noncompliance is substantially justified.”
The motion continued to reflect WWE’s position that counsel’s snubbing of the rules is merely a “continuation of the fraudulent and dishonest conduct for which both Judge Bryant and Judge Richardson have admonished [him].” Citing the February 22 recommended ruling that WWE is requesting to be upheld, WWE pointed to the court’s criticisms, calling Kyros’ responses “deliberately misleading,” as even where counsel did offer some form of response, he did so “without providing any specifics.” Ideally, WWE would have the suit dismissed, but will certainly find solace in sanctions, should the recommendation be upheld.