By Jessica Matthews 
Devin Haney has filed a lawsuit against Ryan Garcia that could reshape how boxing handles doping violations. This legal battle stems from their April 2024 bout where Garcia tested positive for the banned substance Ostarine after defeating the previously unbeaten Haney.
I’ve spent weeks researching this case, talking with boxing insiders, and reviewing court documents. Let me walk you through this unprecedented legal fight that’s sending shockwaves through the boxing world.
The Brooklyn Showdown That Changed Everything
The boxing world watched in shock on April 20, 2024, as Ryan Garcia knocked down the technically superior Devin Haney three times at Brooklyn’s Barclays Center.
Garcia’s surprising majority decision victory immediately sparked controversy for two key reasons:
- He had already missed weight by 3.2 pounds the day before
- Post-fight drug tests would soon reveal banned substances in his system
Top boxing journalist Dan Rafael reported that what started as a standard championship bout quickly escalated into one of boxing’s most contentious legal disputes of 2024.
The Pre-Fight Weight Controversy
The first red flag appeared at the official weigh-in on April 19, 2024.
Garcia stepped on the scales at 143.2 pounds, significantly over the 140-pound super lightweight limit. This weight miss immediately disqualified him from winning Haney’s WBC super lightweight championship regardless of the fight outcome.
The Million-Pound Side Bet: During their heated final press conference, Garcia had agreed to pay Haney roughly £400,000 (approximately $500,000) for every pound he exceeded the weight limit.
According to TMZ Sports, Garcia followed through on this agreement, transferring about £1.2 million ($1.5 million) to Haney after missing weight.
What raised eyebrows among boxing insiders was Garcia’s dismissive attitude about the weight miss. He publicly stated: “Why would I force myself to make weight so I can be weak. Nah I’m here to win.”
This statement later became crucial evidence in Haney’s legal team’s arguments to the New York State Athletic Commission.
The Failed Drug Tests That Triggered Legal Action
The real bombshell dropped when multiple drug tests confirmed Garcia had competed with a prohibited substance in his system.
CBS Sports confirmed that the Voluntary Anti-Doping Association (VADA) found Ostarine in Garcia’s system from samples collected on:
- April 19, 2024 (the day before the fight)
- April 20, 2024 (the day of the fight)
Adding to Garcia’s troubles, a separate test administered by the New York State Athletic Commission also detected Ostarine.
When Garcia exercised his right to have his B-samples tested, the results again confirmed the presence of Ostarine, eliminating any possibility of testing error.
Understanding Ostarine: The PED at the Center of the Case
Ostarine belongs to a class of drugs called Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators (SARMs). The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and boxing commissions strictly prohibit these substances because they:
- Increase muscle growth and strength
- Improve stamina and endurance
- Enhance lean body mass
- Potentially provide unfair competitive advantages
The presence of this performance enhancer in a combat sport like boxing particularly alarmed regulators because of the increased risk of serious injury to the clean athlete.
Garcia’s Contamination Defense Falls Short
Garcia and his legal team consistently denied intentional doping. Their defense strategy centered on three main arguments:
- The “Contaminated Supplement” Claim: They argued Garcia unknowingly ingested Ostarine through tainted supplements.
- The “Ultra-Low Levels” Argument: Garcia’s team emphasized that the detected amounts were “nanograms” (billionths of a gram), suggesting these trace amounts provided no competitive advantage.
- The Hair Follicle Test: Garcia commissioned a private hair follicle test from toxicologist Dr. Pascal Kintz, which reportedly came back negative.
However, Ring Magazine reported that independent testing of the specific supplement batch Garcia identified found no traces of Ostarine. Critics also noted the hair test lacked proper regulatory chain of custody and scientific reliability for detecting recent substance use.
The NYSAC Regulatory Hammer Falls Hard
Following a thorough investigation, the New York State Athletic Commission took decisive action against Garcia.
Rather than proceeding to a formal hearing, Garcia reached a settlement agreement with the NYSAC that included severe penalties:
- A one-year suspension from professional boxing until April 20, 2025
- The maximum allowable fine of £8,000 ($10,000)
- Complete forfeiture of his £880,000 ($1.1 million) official fight purse
- Official changing of the fight result from a Garcia victory to a No-Contest
- Restoration of Haney’s undefeated professional record (31-0, 1 NC)
While these penalties addressed the sporting violations, they did nothing to compensate Haney for his alleged personal and financial damages.
The Civil Lawsuit: Haney Takes the Battle to Federal Court
Not satisfied with just the regulatory outcome, Haney and his promotional company filed a civil lawsuit (Case No. 124-cv-06845) on September 27, 2024, in the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
The lawsuit names both Ryan Garcia and his promoter, Golden Boy Promotions, as defendants.
Court documents reveal four distinct legal claims against Garcia:
1. The Unprecedented Battery Claim
The most legally innovative aspect of Haney’s lawsuit is the battery claim. Legal experts call this approach novel in the context of professional sports.
Haney’s legal team argues that:
- Athletes only consent to physical contact that occurs within the agreed rules
- Garcia’s PED use fundamentally violated those rules
- This violation invalidated Haney’s consent to the physical contact
- Without valid consent, every punch Garcia landed constitutes battery
This legal theory could potentially reshape how courts view consent in professional sports when one participant breaks fundamental rules.
2. The Fraud Allegation
Haney claims Garcia committed fraud by:
- Signing agreements promising clean competition
- Knowingly competing while using banned substances
- Misrepresenting his intention to make the contracted weight
- Inducing Haney to agree to a fight under false pretenses
Haney’s legal team argues he relied on these representations and would not have fought a PED-positive opponent had he known the truth.
3. The Contract Breach
Perhaps the most straightforward claim is breach of contract. Boxing contracts typically require:
- Compliance with anti-doping protocols
- Adherence to weight requirements
- Fighting within established rules
The multiple confirmed positive tests provide clear evidence of violation of these contractual obligations.
4. The Unjust Enrichment Claim
Finally, Haney alleges Garcia unfairly benefited financially from the bout while violating fundamental rules:
- Garcia received significant pay-per-view revenue
- His profile and marketability increased from “defeating” an unbeaten champion
- These benefits came at Haney’s expense through rule violations
Garcia’s £6 Million Counterpunch
In January 2025, Garcia went on the offensive. Court records show he filed not just a defense but a massive £6 million ($7.5 million) counterclaim against Haney.
Garcia’s legal team alleges Haney’s lawsuit is not a legitimate attempt to seek justice but rather:
- A strategic ploy to pressure Garcia into a lucrative rematch
- A calculated effort to cause Garcia economic harm
- A scheme to damage Garcia’s professional reputation
- An attempt to trigger unwarranted investigations
- A publicity stunt to generate media attention for the Haney camp
Boxing promoter Bernard Hopkins publicly supported Garcia, suggesting fighters should settle differences in the ring, not courtrooms.
Current Legal Status: Settlement Talks and Rematch Rumors
As of April 2025, the lawsuit has entered a critical phase focused on potential resolution outside of trial.
The court records reveal:
- Both parties jointly requested to pause the proceedings
- The court granted a temporary stay of litigation
- The case was formally referred to the Eastern District of New York’s Mediation Panel
- A deadline of April 11, 2025, was set for completing mediation
- Regular status reports must be submitted to the court
Sports media, citing legal documents, reported a “tentative settlement” coinciding with active negotiations for a potentially massive rematch between the fighters.
If the mediation fails, the court has established a preliminary schedule that would see fact discovery completed by May 30, 2025, with potential trial dates later in the year.
Why This Legal Battle Matters for Boxing’s Future
This unprecedented case could significantly impact professional boxing in several ways:
For Anti-Doping Enforcement: A substantial judgment favoring Haney could create financial deterrents far stronger than current regulatory penalties. Boxing promoter Eddie Hearn publicly stated this could be “exactly what the sport needs” to combat PED use.
For Boxing Contracts: Industry insiders expect future fight contracts to include more explicit language about PED violations and direct fighter-to-fighter financial penalties.
For Fighter Relationships: Some boxing analysts worry such lawsuits could make fighters more hesitant to sign for bouts with opponents perceived as litigious.
For Fan Trust: The lawsuit highlights the importance of clean competition in maintaining credibility with fans who expect fair contests.
FAQs About the Haney vs Garcia Legal Battle
What damages is Haney seeking in his lawsuit?
While the exact amount is unspecified, legal experts suggest Haney is likely seeking compensation for lost earnings, diminished future opportunities, physical injuries from the fight, reputational damage, and potentially punitive damages.
What makes Ostarine different from other banned substances?
Ostarine is particularly controversial because it provides muscle-building benefits similar to anabolic steroids but is sometimes found in supplements without proper labeling. However, professional athletes are still held responsible for everything they put in their bodies.
Can Haney actually win the battery claim?
Legal experts call this claim challenging but potentially groundbreaking. Haney must convince the court that Garcia’s PED use so fundamentally altered the nature of the contest that it invalidated Haney’s consent to normal boxing contact.
Did Garcia lose all his fight earnings?
No. While Garcia forfeited his £880,000 ($1.1 million) official purse, reporting suggests he likely retained his pay-per-view percentage, which could be substantially higher.
Will there definitely be a rematch?
While not confirmed, industry insiders report rematch negotiations are happening alongside settlement talks. Boxing journalist Dan Rafael suggests a second fight could generate even more interest and revenue than the first contest.
How might this case change boxing contracts?
Future boxing contracts will likely include more explicit language about PED violations, potentially with pre-established damages payable directly between fighters, beyond commission sanctions.
What happens if they settle the lawsuit?
A settlement would end the legal proceedings without a court verdict. The terms would remain private unless disclosed by the parties, but could include financial compensation and potentially set conditions for a rematch.
Has anything like this happened before in boxing?
While boxers have previously faced regulatory sanctions for PED use, direct civil lawsuits between fighters specifically for doping violations remain extremely rare, making this case potentially precedent-setting.
The boxing world watches closely as this legal drama unfolds. Whether through courtroom verdict or negotiated settlement, the unprecedented lawsuit Devin Haney filed against Ryan Garcia will likely influence how boxing handles doping violations for years to come.