BigCrippyZ
12-13-2015, 02:44 AM
It's no secret that Daniel Bryan wants to wrestle again and is trying to get cleared by WWE's medical staff to return to the ring.
It's been brought up by others how strange the whole situation has been so far. I'm inclined to agree that it's definitely one of the stranger situations that's played out behind the scenes.
I wonder though if some of the issues and delay are a result of not only the medical issues but also from Bryan and WWE trying to figure out what their contractual legal options and obligations are?
Obviously, we're unfortunately not privy to this information, but if WWE's own doctor's won't clear him to perform as a professional wrestler, what are Bryan's and WWE's contractual options and obligations?
Is WWE required to continue to pay him for the remainder of his contract even if their own doctor's won't clear him and he refuses to perform in another capacity (i.e., a general entertainer, on air character, announcer, interviewer or even a trainer)?
Is Bryan contractually obligated to eventually perform in another capacity for the remainder of his contract if WWE's doctors won't clear him? At least so far, that would appear to not be the case.
What are Bryan's options if WWE's doctors can't or simply refuse to clear him to wrestle? Can he simply get out of his contract and walk away without any potential financial or legal losses or liability to WWE? While possible, that seems highly unlikely absent WWE agreeing in the future to simply let him leave.
Are WWE's doctors (or the company itself for that matter) contractually required to have a legitimate, reasonable medical justification and explanation to Bryan as to why he isn't and/or won't/can't ever be medically cleared in the future by WWE to wrestle?
In addition, is there an appeals or override process in place that would allow Bryan to wrestle for WWE again in the event that WWE or WWE's doctors refuse to clear a talent to wrestle? If Bryan can get so many certified neurologists to provide him clearance for example, will that override the decision of WWE or its doctors? If not, I could definitely see this becoming an issue that will and should be addressed in future WWE talent contracts.
That also raises another interesting issue that I believe Punk mentioned after he left WWE. What are WWE's doctors obligations to the company and the talent and is there a conflict of interest? Do WWE's doctors obligations to the company as employees outweigh or influence their obligations to the talent that they diagnose and treat?
You'd think that with a company the size of WWE and the money, etc., involved, most of these issues would be addressed in WWE policies and the contractual agreements between WWE and its talent. Unfortunately, I can tell you from first hand experience, no matter the type or size of the company, money or people involved, etc., that's not always the case.
All too often issues like those above get overlooked or deemed not likely, unimportant or inapplicable and go unaddressed even by the most experienced of companies and attorneys. Either that or there is a dispute as to the interpretation, intent of the parties or ambiguity of a particular contractual term and whether it addresses a particular issue.
I'd love to know the answers to some of these issues. That being said, I could see both sides currently trying to figure and work out these issues themselves, in addition to all the medical issues going on too.
It's been brought up by others how strange the whole situation has been so far. I'm inclined to agree that it's definitely one of the stranger situations that's played out behind the scenes.
I wonder though if some of the issues and delay are a result of not only the medical issues but also from Bryan and WWE trying to figure out what their contractual legal options and obligations are?
Obviously, we're unfortunately not privy to this information, but if WWE's own doctor's won't clear him to perform as a professional wrestler, what are Bryan's and WWE's contractual options and obligations?
Is WWE required to continue to pay him for the remainder of his contract even if their own doctor's won't clear him and he refuses to perform in another capacity (i.e., a general entertainer, on air character, announcer, interviewer or even a trainer)?
Is Bryan contractually obligated to eventually perform in another capacity for the remainder of his contract if WWE's doctors won't clear him? At least so far, that would appear to not be the case.
What are Bryan's options if WWE's doctors can't or simply refuse to clear him to wrestle? Can he simply get out of his contract and walk away without any potential financial or legal losses or liability to WWE? While possible, that seems highly unlikely absent WWE agreeing in the future to simply let him leave.
Are WWE's doctors (or the company itself for that matter) contractually required to have a legitimate, reasonable medical justification and explanation to Bryan as to why he isn't and/or won't/can't ever be medically cleared in the future by WWE to wrestle?
In addition, is there an appeals or override process in place that would allow Bryan to wrestle for WWE again in the event that WWE or WWE's doctors refuse to clear a talent to wrestle? If Bryan can get so many certified neurologists to provide him clearance for example, will that override the decision of WWE or its doctors? If not, I could definitely see this becoming an issue that will and should be addressed in future WWE talent contracts.
That also raises another interesting issue that I believe Punk mentioned after he left WWE. What are WWE's doctors obligations to the company and the talent and is there a conflict of interest? Do WWE's doctors obligations to the company as employees outweigh or influence their obligations to the talent that they diagnose and treat?
You'd think that with a company the size of WWE and the money, etc., involved, most of these issues would be addressed in WWE policies and the contractual agreements between WWE and its talent. Unfortunately, I can tell you from first hand experience, no matter the type or size of the company, money or people involved, etc., that's not always the case.
All too often issues like those above get overlooked or deemed not likely, unimportant or inapplicable and go unaddressed even by the most experienced of companies and attorneys. Either that or there is a dispute as to the interpretation, intent of the parties or ambiguity of a particular contractual term and whether it addresses a particular issue.
I'd love to know the answers to some of these issues. That being said, I could see both sides currently trying to figure and work out these issues themselves, in addition to all the medical issues going on too.