WWE triumphs again in CTE lawsuit dismissal

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City has affirmed a Connecticut federal judge”™s dismissal of concussion-related lawsuits filed by 50 former wrestlers against the WWE.

WWE Hall of Fame member Jimmy “Superfly” Snuka.

The wrestlers claimed they suffered chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), along with a number of other physical and mental afflictions, while performing for the Stamford firm.

Among the wrestlers were Jimmy “Superfly” Snuka, who died in 2017, and Harry Masayoshi “Mr. Fuji” Fujiwara, who died a year later; both were diagnosed with CTE following their deaths. Co-plaintiff Chris “King Kong Bundy” Pallies died last year of undisclosed causes, while the others are suffering from dementia and other illnesses, according to the suit.

The lawsuit, which also named WWE Chairman Vince McMahon as a defendant, maintained that the defendants were aware of the risks of head injuries but failed to warn the wrestlers.

In 2018, Judge Vanessa L. Bryant of the U.S. District Court of Connecticut dismissed the lawsuits by ruling that WWE was not liable for those injuries; stating that some of the complaints were filed incorrectly; and saying that the complaints fell outside five-year statutes of limitations.

Attorney Konstantine Kyros vowed at that time to appeal Bryant”™s decision, which also ordered Kyros to pay WWE”™s legal fees, estimated at several hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Kyros decried the latest decision but acknowledged that further appeals would not be allowed.

“For nearly six years, WWE was subjected to stale and frivolous claims brought by Konstantine Kyros, whose misconduct triggered countless judicial opinions along the way,” WWE said in a statement.

“Today, the Second Circuit put an end to his pattern of baseless litigation, leaving open only the question of how much he must now pay to WWE as a sanction for his misconduct. We are grateful for the attention paid to these cases by the numerous federal judges who oversaw the litigation, and to the Second Circuit for its decision.”