Oscar De La Hoya vs. Vergil Ortiz Ends Without Resolution, Parties to Reconvene
- Matthew Brown
- 1 hour ago
- 4 min read
02/20/2026
The war and the wait continues.
Today’s court proceedings between Oscar De La Hoya and his company Golden Boy Promotions and its unbeaten star Vergil Ortiz Jr. ended without resolution. After hours of arguments inside a Las Vegas federal courtroom, U.S. District Judge Cristina D. Silva took the matter under advisement and indicated that a written order will follow in the coming days.
At the center of the dispute is Ortiz’s request to terminate his promotional agreement and his lawsuit alleging breach of contract and interference with prospective economic advantage. The 24-0 interim champion filed a 32 page complaint seeking to sever ties with Golden Boy, his promoter since turning professional in 2016, along with unspecified damages.
Golden Boy responded swiftly.
“We are aware of the lawsuit,” the company said in a prepared statement. “Unfortunately, Vergil is getting bad advice from his lawyer and manager who have repeatedly violated the contract. We will aggressively defend this lawsuit and enforce our rights. We are confident a judge will agree that our contract is valid and Vergil and his team are in breach.”
Ortiz is represented by Gregory M. Smith, the same attorney who represented Canelo Alvarez in his 2020 lawsuit against Golden Boy.
Hanging in the balance is a high stakes showdown with Jaron Ennis, promoted by Eddie Hearn’s Matchroom Boxing USA. Ennis, 35-0 with 31 knockouts, recently moved up to the 154 pound division where Ortiz holds a secondary title.
The two fighters faced off in the ring last November after Ortiz stopped Erickson Lubin, just weeks after Ennis blasted out Uisma Lima in one round. Matchroom had already agreed to terms on its end for a proposed April 18 bout on DAZN.
But negotiations stalled amid an escalating dispute between Golden Boy and Ortiz’s manager Rick Mirigian. On social media, De La Hoya demanded a 60 40 split in favor of Ortiz and set a deadline for Ennis’ promoter. When that timeline passed, De La Hoya suggested he would pursue other options. Mirigian countered publicly, citing a lack of communication from Golden Boy and offering the fight to another promoter.
De La Hoya fired back online, blaming Mirigian and telling him to get out of the way.
A central issue in court was whether Golden Boy’s distribution relationship with DAZN had terminated at the end of 2025 when its long term output deal expired. Ortiz argues that the absence of a signed long term agreement triggered Section 10 g of his Promotional Rights Agreement and gave him the right to walk away.
Golden Boy insists there is a meaningful distinction between termination of a contract and termination of a relationship. The company noted that it received two one off dates from DAZN in January and March and has been negotiating a new agreement for 2026 and 2027.
In sworn testimony, DAZN chief operating officer Ed McCarthy stated that the company remains open to a long term agreement with Golden Boy whether or not Ortiz is under contract. He also acknowledged Ortiz was close to finalizing a three bout deal with Matchroom for at least 12 million dollars and potentially as much as 20 million dollars.
Golden Boy countered that McCarthy is also listed as a manager or member of Matchroom in California filings and argued that his declaration should be viewed with skepticism due to that connection.
De La Hoya previously secured a temporary restraining order preventing Ortiz from negotiating with other promoters. Ortiz’s legal team filed a motion opposing the TRO. Within 24 hours, Golden Boy submitted its reply in support of emergency relief.
Golden Boy argued that Ortiz admitted to unauthorized negotiations with third parties while still under contract and that dissolving the TRO would cause irreparable harm, including damage to its relationship with DAZN and its ability to conduct business. The company emphasized that arbitration must determine the interpretation of the Promotional Rights Agreement and that allowing Ortiz to sign elsewhere would eviscerate its rights.
Judge Silva pressed both sides. She questioned Golden Boy on why injunctive relief should continue without a signed long term DAZN agreement in place and asked whether an alternative broadcaster existed. Golden Boy acknowledged there is no present alternative but said meetings this weekend surrounding the Ryan Garcia event in Las Vegas could lead to progress.
Ortiz’s counsel argued that any distribution relationship must be defined by contract and that financial damages would be sufficient if Golden Boy ultimately prevails. He emphasized the short earning window of a professional boxer and claimed the public interest favors making Ortiz versus Ennis a reality in Las Vegas.
Judge Silva appeared skeptical at times of both arguments, particularly regarding the role of arbitration and the alleged conflict involving McCarthy. She set a five day deadline for Ortiz to respond to Golden Boy’s motion to compel arbitration. The existing TRO will expire two days after that filing.
For now, the case remains unresolved. Judge Silva said she intends to issue a written order within days.
In the meantime, a blockbuster clash between two undefeated junior middleweights remains on hold. Whether Ortiz can pursue the Ennis fight without Golden Boy or whether arbitration will dictate his immediate future is now up to the court.
Subscribe to the Brunch Boxing website, Twitter and Podcast for more updates and in-depth coverage of the world of boxing in and out of the ring.
Brunch Boxing Support Links:
Comments