WWE Attorney Comments On Supreme Court Refusing To Hear "Concussion Lawsuits" Appeals

The United States Supreme Court has declined to hear the appeals of several former WWE Superstars who claimed that WWE failed to protect them from repeated head injuries that led to long-term brain damage in the "concussion lawsuits" filed by attorney Konstantine Kyros.

Advertisement

The lawsuits had previously been dismissed by lower courts, but the wrestlers and Kyros asked the high court to review those rulings because they were filed too late. The Supreme Court did not explain today's decision under its usual practice, but the decision puts an end to the last remaining lawsuits in an array of litigation that began 6 years ago, by Kyros.

Kyros alleged in a statement to ESPN today that WWE exploited the wrestlers and denied them access to health care and workers' compensation.

"The wrestlers are dying of CTE despite the inaction of the justice system,," Kyros said in a statement today. "Our team is proud to have brought their claims to our highest court and hopeful that this brings awareness to their ongoing struggles."

Advertisement

WWE attorney Jerry McDevitt also commented on today's denial in a statement to ESPN.

"We're glad it's finally over," McDevitt said. "We were completely vindicated."

As we've noted, Kyros represented several WWE Hall of Famers and former Superstars in the suits, including Road Warrior Animal, Paul Orndorff, Chavo Guerrero Jr., Ahmed Johnson, Dave and Earl Hebner, Sabu, Marty Jannetty, Shane Douglas, the late Jimmy Snuka, the late King Kong Bundy, the late Mr. Fuji, the late Kamala, Barry Darsow, and Heidenreich, among several others. WWE Chairman & CEO Vince McMahon was listed as a defendant in the suit.

You can click here for more on the case, including details on WWE seeking almost $575,000 in legal fees from Kyros.

Today's ruling by the Supreme Court means the case is 100% done, except for a ruling on Kyros paying WWE's legal fees. This was a last ditch effort to get the Supreme Court to hear arguments on why the previously-dismissed cases should have been re-opened.

Stay tuned for more.

Comments

Recommended