How the Nunez Lawsuit Could Be Trouble for ACES

This represents the first post by new contributor Sheryl Ring. An attorney in the Chicago area, Ring will cover legal matters for FanGraphs. We’re excited to have her!

Until this week, Juan Carlos Nunez was most famous for having made a website for a fake company selling a fake product, in an attempt to convince the world that Melky Cabrera’s flunked drug test in 2012 wasn’t really Melky’s fault. Since those revelations, Nunez has been barred from baseball permanently and also spent a few months in prison for his involvement with Biogenesis. You would have been forgiven for thinking it would be the last you’d hear of Juan Carlos Nunez.

But if baseball is done with Nunez, it seems as though Nunez isn’t quite done with baseball. This week, Nunez filed a 30-page lawsuit against his former employer, Athletes’ Careers Enhanced and Secured, Inc. (ACES, for short), demanding $3 million in damages. ACES is one of the largest and most well known baseball agencies.  According to MLBTradeRumors’ Agency Database, ACES is the current representation for stars like Charlie Blackmon, Carlos Carrasco, and Dustin Pedroia among more than 50 other notable major leaguers. And in 2012, ACES represented Cabrera, as well. You might also have heard of ACES’ two most high-profile names, Sam and Seth Levinson, who are also named as defendants in Nunez’s lawsuit. Sam is the President of ACES; Seth is its CEO.

Nunez contends in the Complaint that the Levinsons knew about Nunez arranging for players to receive performance enhancing drugs like HGH from Anthony Bosch and Biogenesis and actually instructed Nunez to distribute those PEDs to players. Nunez says that better performance meant better numbers and bigger paychecks for players — and bigger commissions for the Levinsons and ACES. According to the Complaint, the Levinsons wanted Nunez to make Biogenesis a selling point in his pitch to get new players to sign with ACES. Nunez even namechecks a couple of stars in his Complaint, alleging that he personally, with the Levinsons’ knowledge and approval, arranged for Nelson Cruz to receive HGH in the early 2012 to help him recover from an infection. And Nunez also says that the whole fake-website debacle was the Levinsons’ idea. As you can imagine, there is a lot to unpack here.

It’s probably important to note that, for the most part, Nunez has a pretty weak case. Underneath all of the sensational allegations about performance-enhancing drugs is actually a pretty standard breach of contract claim. In this case, the contract in question was for Nunez’s employment with ACES. (For those of you who are wondering, Nunez specifically alleges he was employed pursuant to a contract and not an at-will employee.) Nunez says the Levinsons and ACES breached it by failing to pay him finder’s fees and commissions on clients he recruited to the agency, and not reimbursing him for various expenses. But courts, as a general rule, won’t enforce a contract that requires a party to do something that’s illegal. And that’s true even if one of the parties to the contract doesn’t actually do what the contract requires.

Nunez filed in New York, so I’ll use a New York case as an example. In McConnell v. Commonwealth Pictures Corp., the plaintiff sued the defendant for commissions he never received related to a movie distribution. The only problem was that the plaintiff got those distributions by bribery. And so even though the plaintiff in McConnell failed to receive his commissions, the court in McConnell basically said that it would corrupt the moral fabric of society to enforce a contract where a party performed an illegal act.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

Now, we don’t have all of the details, and it’s certainly possible that at least some of Nunez’s commissions are based on actions not related to Biogenesis, or Bosch, or HGH, or fake websites. But the problem is that Nunez says in his own complaint that he used Biogenesis as a basis for recruiting players to ACES. And that means that Nunez is basically suing the Levinsons for not paying him for the very actions which landed him in prison. If that’s true, it’s hard for me to see how this isn’t an illegal contract.

That said, the Levinsons could — could, I stress — have a problem anyway. The most reported allegations in the Complaint tie ACES and the Levinsons to PEDs. Perhaps equally important, however, are allegations by Nunez that the Levinsons and ACES, against the express instructions of the MLBPA, gave kickbacks to players and players’ families. According to Nunez, ACES paid 10% of its commissions to Fernando Rodney and his family as an incentive for him to return to their agency. Nunez says in his Complaint that ACES and the Levinsons did so despite being told by the MLBPA not to contact Rodney. Nunez says that it was standard practice at ACES to compensate players in this way for hiring, or remaining with, ACES.

And Nunez lays out in his Complaint a conspiracy between the Levinsons and ACES to have Nunez take the fall for the entire scheme — websites, PEDs, and all — while telling Nunez they would protect him and continue to pay him. According to Nunez, this conspiracy included hiring a lawyer for Nunez, having Nunez leave the country during an investigation, and having Nunez lie to a reporter, among other things.

Nunez’s credibility has serious questions. After all, after Nunez’s resignation, the MLBPA actually investigated ACES and the Levinsons to determine their role in the website saga and eventually cleared them. The MLBPA also reportedly declined to investigate whether ACES was involved in PEDs at that time.

But if there’s any truth to what Nunez is alleging, there could actually be some fallout here. The MLBPA, which certifies and regulates player agents, expressly prohibits in Rule §5(B)(5) the sort of kickbacks Nunez is alleging. And Rule §5(B)(20) also prohibits an agent from providing banned substances to a player. And so it will be interesting to see how seriously MLB and the MLBPA react to these allegations, given their apparent seriousness on the one hand and their source on the other.





Sheryl Ring is a litigation attorney and General Counsel at Open Communities, a non-profit legal aid agency in the Chicago suburbs. You can reach her on twitter at @Ring_Sheryl. The opinions expressed here are solely the author's. This post is intended for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice.

23 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Matt
8 years ago

If Sheryl Ring is correct that Nunez contract was no longer valid due to his committing illegal acts, but Nunez can prove that the Levinsons promised to continue to pay him for lying to, or withholding information from,authorities then the promise of payment from the Levinsons becomes an offer of a bribe to conduct illegal activity.

I’m not so sure Nunez can get much out of this case but the Levinsons have a great deal to lose.

The Real McNulty
8 years ago
Reply to  Matt

yes, this likely was Nunez’ final available move after trying to reach a settlement agreement with ACES.

Dominikk85Member since 2020
8 years ago

Maybe nunez also knows he is down and out and now wants to take the agency boss down with him as a revenge.

Maybe he sees himself as a scapegoat and now wants to sink the rest of the crew.

jtricheyMember since 2021
8 years ago

Very interesting. This at least has the potential to be really big. If there’s any truth to what Nunez is alleging, then I would say there BETTER be some fallout here.

NathanielMember since 2016
8 years ago

Welcome!

Is the move here to survive a motion to dismiss, go to discovery, get some really damaging info and then use the dirt as settlement leverage?

Boofer
8 years ago
Reply to  Sheryl Ring

Lenny Dykstra wrote a book called “Nails”. In it Dykstra said he hired a private detective to dig up dirt on umpires and then blackmailed some of them to provide a favorable strike zone for himself and his Phillies teammates. If this is true it’s the biggest game fixing scandal since the Black Sox.

No corporate media have ever acknowledged Dykstra’s book. He is blacklisted from all corporate baseball media who insist they are part of a “free press” here in the USA.

Could you address the legal issues in Dykstra’s book in a future column?

madfencerMember since 2017
8 years ago

I’m confused about the issue of kickbacks. Why would the agency give a kickback to a client rather than just charging a smaller commission?

Ryan DCMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  madfencer

I was wondering the same thing. Perhaps charging a smaller commission to certain clients would have raised the suspicions of the MLBPA, or there could have been tax implications. Presumably the discrepancy would have been apparent in publicly available records one way or another, otherwise I agree it doesn’t make much sense.

David AppelmanFanGraphs Staff
8 years ago
Reply to  Ryan DC

This incidentally was also my question. One answer I received was that a client could be “cash poor”, and need money prior to signing with the Agency.

Though I completely agree that outside of needing money right this second, I’m not sure why an Agency would risk running afoul of the rules when there appears to be a perfectly legitimate way to give more money to your clients.

madfencerMember since 2017
8 years ago
Reply to  Sheryl Ring

Thanks for the response! I don’t even understand why kickbacks would be against the rules in this case. My understanding is that usually, there is a third party who is the victim in a kickback case. Like, I decide that my company is going to become a client of some vendor, and the vendor kicks me back some of the payments, so my company is a victim. In this case it seems like it’s just two parties exchanging money, so who’s the victim?

Edit: that is, assuming that Rodney and his family are working together.

Paul22
8 years ago
Reply to  madfencer

My company did the same thing. Companies dont like to drop prices since other clients will find out. Prices are easier to leak out while “rebates” are not as easy to find out about since fewer people are involved in the latter (eg MLBPA probably sees all player-agent contracts, while rebates can be a handshake deal or something else not required to share). Also, If one of your clients find out you give a lower price to another customer they may leave or demand the same. Also, many companies are more focused on revenue growth which are looked at in any future sale of the agency or for marketing. A full commision is better than a discounted commission for that purpose. Rebates just are expenses that reduce profit and not income.

tb.25
8 years ago

” the court in McConnell basically said that it would corrupt the moral fabric of society to enforce a contract where a party performed an illegal act.”

I found this to be counter intuitive, from the court’s perspective. In essence, the court is saying ‘if you, as a company, write a contract that requires illegal action, you will not have to pay your contractor.

If anything, the court should require payment, as it could dissuade companies from trying to break the law.

scooter262
8 years ago
Reply to  tb.25

It would be amazingly stupid for a company to actually leave a paper trail where they’re hiring someone to do something illegal. You don’t, for eample, sign a legal document like a contract if you want to take out a hit on someone. Nunez’s argument isn’t built on having a contract stating that he should supply PEDs to players he recruits: it’s built on him hoping he can provide enough dirt to convince the judge.

v2miccaMember since 2016
8 years ago

This lawsuit strikes me as a legal shakedown by Nunez. I seriously doubt he can provide sufficient evidence to corroborate any of his allegations. But he will be able to seriously damage the reputation of ACES and the Levinsons and thus negatively impact their ability to attract and retain future clientele. The entire situation appears designed to coerce the Levinsons into a more favorable settlement with Nunez, simply to make him go away.

Mike NMN
8 years ago

Very nice job. Would any of the “kickbacked to the client” commission have been advanced payments?

HawkeyethelastMember since 2017
8 years ago

Welcome to Fangraphs! It’s wonderful to experience another diverse perspective on baseball.

If the lawsuit is allowed to go forward and Nunez is awarded damages could this lawsuit be used as a basis for further litigation against ACES and the Levinsons by MLB and MLBPA?

P.S. I am very much looking forward to your fangraphs audio debut!

Paul22
8 years ago

If true you can bet they settle out of court before it gets too messy for Aces, to the point MLBPA has to decertify them.

JolieMember since 2017
8 years ago

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but my understanding is that libel can’t be asserted if such salacious claims are made solely in a legal document.

Johnny Dickshot
8 years ago
Reply to  Jolie

Without writing a full legal memo, the right to petition (1st Am.) and the related Noerr-Pennington doctrine do provide some protection for statements made in lawsuits, but it is not absolute, and does not cover intentional misrepresentations, even if in a legal document (indeed, there are lots of legal rules that punish making false statements in a lawsuit, including perjury and discovery sanctions against counsel and parties).

But with that as background, it is very, very difficult to make a defamation/libel claim based on allegedly false statements in a petition, and based on this article, I doubt there’s any basis for it in this case.