117 Onoo Response To Summary Judgment

Case 1:00-cv-00368-CC Document 117 Filed 01/16/03 Page 1 of 65
n .
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA~'-~"'Qi
MAG1S1'HA'1'EJUDGE DIV.
r-'` ~`
ATLANTA DIVISION
N. D. GEORGIA
l~
oZ ao3
.IAN 1 L ~,003
KAZUO ON00,
Plaintiff,
- I
Civil Action No . :
1 :00-CV-0368 (CC)
v.
UNIVERSAL WRESTLING,
CORPORATION f/k/a
WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP WRESTLING,
INC ., TURNER SPORTS, INC .,
TURNER ENTERTAINMENT GROUP,
INC . and TURNER BROADCASTING
SYSTEM, INC .,
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Defendants .
PLAINTIFF ONOO'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS'

MOTION FOR SUHA114RY JUDGMENT
Cary Ichter
Charles J . Gernazian
Michelle M . Rothenberg-Williams
MEADOWS, ICHTER fi BOWERS, P .C .
Fourteen Piedmont Center
Suite 1100
3535 Piedmont Road
Atlanta, GA 30305
(404) 261-6020
I1`1
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
Defendants are not entitled to summary Judgment because

Onoo has produced unequivocal direct evidence that Vince Russo,
acting with racial animus,
caused Onoo's termination .
Although
Defendants have tried everything possible to deny Russo's

involvement
in Onoo's firing,
the evidence
Russo did not want to use Japanese persons
is
fired .
Indeed,
Vince
in his wrestling
shows and caused Asian and Hispanic talent,

get
clear :
including Onoo to
a senior WCW official testifies that Russo
specifically told WCW officials to "get rid of Asian talent"
because Russo "was not going to use the Asian/Japanese talent ."
(Tab A) .
In addition,
Russo even publicly announced his
aversion to Japanese talent
a Japanese guy ."

about
Similarly,
a Mexican guy ."
never ever, ever, ever,
stating :
don't give a shit
about
he announced "I don't give a shit
And he also declared publicly :
"You will
ever see the Japanese wrestler or the
Mexican wrestler over in America ."
Furthermore,
"I
(Tab B) .
even though not required to do so, Onoo can
easily establish discrimination under the McDonnell Douglas
methodology of proving discrimination .
Onoo can establish
"directly" through ample evidence that WCW discriminated
pretext
against Onoo and other Asian talent as well as demonstrate that

Defendants' purported non-discriminatory reason is not worthy of
credence .
Defendants cannot obtain summary judgment, among other
reasons,
because Defendants have not even consistently
identified the actual decision-maker as to Onoo .
Similarly,
Defendants have also changed the purported non-discriminatory

reason in response to Onoo's success at demonstrating the
falsehoods
of Defendants'
initial
reasons
for his termination .
Nevertheless, despite their affirmative responses,
and
despite their failure to seasonably supplement their

Interrogatory Responses,
Onoo "was not,
Defendants now belatedly contend that
and did not have the potential to be, a major
contributing factor to maintaining or growing ratings

(DB at
for WCW ."
19) .
Although Defendants are entitled to rely upon subjective

decision-making,
Defendants must nevertheless articulate an
objective and reasonable basis for such subjective conclusions

in order to allow Onoo to rebut
reason .
In this case,
(or fail to rebut)
the proffered
Defendants have relied on nothing in the
record to support Busch's belated self-serving conclusion that
- 2 -
Onoo "was not" and did not have the "potential" to contribute to
WCW's ratings .
Thus, because Defendants have not even set forth
the factual predicate for Busch's subjective opinions, Onoo has

not been afforded a
as
is
fair opportunity to rebut Busch's
"reason,"
required under Supreme Court authority .

Nevertheless,
even if this Court somehow accepts
Defendants' purported reasons, Onoo has established ample

evidence of pretext .
Onoo can easily establish pretext through
Russo's and other WCW's officials'
regular use of racial slurs
such as "Jap" and "gook ."
racial insensitivity was so
Indeed,
entrenched at WCW that WCW's legal counsel
referred to Onoo as
"the gook ."

Onoo can also establish pretext by demonstrating that
Busch's purported concern about Onoo's ability to affect ratings
is "unworthy of belief ."
WCW's own marketing research
identified Onoo with the highest
rating in his category -
negative appeal .
As set forth infra ,
guys
to generate ratings .
- "heels" -
WCW heavily relied on bad

Indeed,
even Busch
congratulated Onoo for receiving such a high rating in

September,
1999 .
(Onoo at 52) .
Thus,
because Onoo was one of
the most successful non-wrestling "heels," a jury could easily

conclude that Defendants'
assertion that Onoo did not have
- 3 -
"potential" to affect ratings is a pretext to racial

discrimination .
Also,
because WCW assigned Onoo to work exclusively with
minority talent
wrestler)
(Japanese,
Hispanic,
and an African-American
and refused to allow him to work with Caucasian
wrestlers,
Defendants are also liable to Onoo for their illegal
race-based decision-making in the scripting and producing of

their wrestling shows .
Also, these race-based decisions
prevented Onoo from obtaining career opportunities given to

Caucasians .
Similarly,
Defendants are liable for the racially
hostile environment .
As to Onoo's retaliation claim,
Defendants completely
ignore the retaliatory adverse actions taking by Diana Myers,

WCW's legal counsel who,
among other things, denied Onoo his
right to obtain the licensing revenue and other monies
that were
due him in connection with his CD/record agreements after he
complained of racial discrimination .

evidence also reveals that Ms .
And to the extent that the
Myers participated in the
decision to terminate his contract, a jury must also decide the

causal relationship between Onoo's protected activity and her
role
in Onoo's discriminatory termination .

As to Onoo's Title VII claims,
employee under Title VII .
Onoo shows he was
Alternatively,
- 4
an
Onoo is entitled to
recover because Defendants denied him employment status based on

his
race and/or national origin,
in violation of Title VII .
Lastly, Onoo is entitled to a jury trial as to his

contractual rights to additional funds for WCW's Compact
Discs
sales and revenue .

STATEMENT OF FACTS
Onoo is Japanese .
States since childhood,
Although he has
and is a United States resident, he
remains a Japanese citizen .

ONOO'S
lived in the United
(Onoo Aff,
at 9f 2,
Tab C) .
RELATIONSHIP WITH WCW :
Onoo does not dispute Defendants' general chronology of

events as to how he began his relationship with WCW,
and WCW's
existing President Eric Bischoff's role in bringing Onoo to WCW,

but Onoo denies
Defendants'
characterization of the remaining
aspects of the relationship .

Although Onoo and Bischoff were friends,
forward,
from at least 1996
Onoo principally dealt with WCW attorneys Nick Lambros
and/or Diana Myers in negotiating his

business agreements with WCW .
Furthermore,
contracts and various
(Onoo at 22,
38,
41,
151,
212) .
because of their friendship, Onoo and Bischoff
agreed to maintain their distance in the workplace .
In fact,
Onoo did not want Bischoff to solely make decisions as
- 5 -
to Onoo,
and Onoo refrained from complaining to Bischoff because of their

close friendship .
(Onoo Aff . at 1 11, Tab C) .
Becomes an On-Air Talent,

Manaainq Minority Wrestler
But
Is Restricted To
Although Defendants correctly note that Onoo soon expanded

his role at WCW to also become an "on-air" talent
(DB at 6),
Defendants fail to acknowledge that Onoo was exclusively

assigned to work as "an on-air talent" for Japanese,
and African-American wrestlers .
Hispanic,
Although Onoo very much wanted
to work with Caucasian wrestlers,
and although the Caucasian
wrestlers wanted to work with Onoo, Onoo was exclusively used to

appear with minority wrestlers
Bruce at
9,
(Onoo Aff . at 11 4,
10) .
Vince Russo Arrives At WCW And Proclaims His

Discard Japanese Wrestling Talent :
On or about September 30,
an
25, Tab C ;
1999,
Intent To
Vince Russo participated in
Internet discussion with a wrestling professional analyst,
Ben Miller who maintained a website devoted to discussions and
communications regarding the wrestling industry .

interview,
In the
which was published over the Internet Russo stated :
"I'm going to tell you something right now that you will
absolutely not agree with, but I've been a wrestling fan my
whole life and I will live and die by this-it is hard
enough, believe me I write this shit, it is hard enough to
get somebody over .
You will never ever, ever, ever see the
Japanese wrestler or the Mexican wrestler over in American
mainstream wrestling .
And the simple reason for that is,
- 6 -
even myself, I'm an American . . .if I'm watching wrestling

here in America, I don't give a shit about a Japanese guy .
I don't give a shit about a Mexican guy .
2'm from America,
and that's what I want to see .
Now there are the smart
fans that love that type of shit, like you ."
(See Miller Aff .
and Russo Interview,
Despite Russo's
racist comments,
Tab B) .
WCW hired Russo to work as
its creative director on or about October 10,

15) .
In his
capacity as creative director,
the Booking Committee,
1999 .
(Russo at
and as the head of
Russo decided which wrestlers would
receive television exposure and which ones would not .

at 18) .
At or about the time that Russo became the creative
director,
he once again expressed racial bias against Asians and
Hispanics,
on TV ."
(Ferrara
stating that "he didn't want to put Japs and Mexicans
(Sullivan at
57) .
According to the Vice President of WCW Enterprises,

Russo arrived he informed WCW officials that
lon ger have a need for Japanese talent ."
Tab A) .
when
"WCW would no
(Hassman Aff .
at 9f
11,
He also instructed them to "get rid of Asian talent
because he was not going to use the Asian/Japanese stars on WCW

events ."
(Id .) .
Vince Russo also made various statements demonstrating his

bias
in favor of the Caucasians who controlled WCW .
Russo
stated that "whites rule wrestling" and that wrestling was a

"white man's sport ."
(Williams Aff . at 9f 12, Tab D) .

- 7 -
Thus,
according to Booker Kevin Sullivan,

wrestlers" on his programming .
Russo wanted "American
(Onoo at
192) .
Russo further
stated that he was going to run things the way that he wanted
and he was going to have a "white champion because that's the

way he wanted
Williams,
persons,
it ."
(Id .) .
According to Production Coordinator
Russo made it clear that he did not want Oriental

African-Americans or Hispanics succeeding at WCW ."
(Id .) .
AT OR ABOUT THE TIME VINCE RUSSO JOINED WCW,
AND STOPPED USING ASIAN WRESTLERS :
WCW FIRED ON00
Although Russo states that he became the Creative Director

at WCW on October 10,
1999,
the evidence shows that WCW began
implementing his elimination of Asian and Hispanic talent even

during the
arrival .
time in which Russo and WrW were finalizing his

(Onoo Aff .
19,
at 11 12,
24,
Tab C) .
For example,
fired Japanese wrestler Mr . Asai in or about September,

(Onoo at
WCW
1999 .
75-77) .
Similarly,
on October 6,
assistant in an email,
1999, WCW attorney asked her
"which Mexicans have we released by
already sending letters?"
(Tab E) .
And when Russo officially became the Creative Director at
WCW, Onoo's mistreatment began .
Production employee Moses
Williams recalls that Russo did not respond favorably to Onoo as
- 8 -
Russo
"would not make eye contact"
preoccupied ."
(Williams at 200) .
Onoo was arriving at the shows,
Onoo was then fired,

recalls
[with Onoo]
but was not used .
1999 .
In addition to firing
always
(Id .
at 201) .
Producer Kearce
that he asked what happened to Onoo,
he's gone ."
"was
Williams further recalls that
on November 3,
tightlipped about it,
or he
but "everyone was
(Kearce at 58) .
Onoo and Mr . Asai, WCW treated other
Japanese wrestlers adversely .
Indeed,
the evidence suggests
that Russo would have fired all of the Japanese, but that some
had special contracts that had been made by Bischoff in
connection with Bischoff's relationship with New Japan .
(Williams at 256-257) .
As to one of these Japanese wrestlers,
Russo reluctantly allowed him to stay, but complained,

office is making me use this guy ."
Thus,
the
few remaining Asian talent
including Jusiun Liger,
"the
(Williams at 256-257) .
suffered adverse treatment,
the Great Muta,
and Kaz Hayashi .
(Onoo
at 63-65 ; Williams at 253-257) .

In sum,
as a result of Russo's "booking philosophy," the
Asian wrestlers "sat on the sidelines and they weren't used ."
(Sullivan at 70) .
- 9 -
WCW CONTINUED TO USE MALES IN THE POSITION OF NON-WRESTLING

AIR TALENT AFTER WCW FIRED SONNY ON00 :
After Onoo was
fired,
WCW continued to use on-air non-
wrestling talent such as Jimmy Hart,

Jeremy Borash,
Similarly,
and John Riker
after Onoo was
the wrestling matches .
Eric Bischoff,
("Ralphus") .
fired,
Ed Ferrara,
(See Tabs
BB,
H) .
WCW continued to use agents
(Bischoff at 29 ;
in
Eerrara at 26) .
Thus, after WCW fired Onoo, WCW continued to spend money on

Caucasian males for on-air non-wrestling talent roles such as
managers and wrestling agents as well
personalities,
Onoo .
similar to those roles that had been performed by
Moreover,
WCW continued to maintain employment
Hart who similar to Onoo,

talent,
Aff .
as on-air wrestling
was not
for Jimmy
only a non-wrestling "on-air"
but also did many administrative duties for WCW .
at 9f
28,
(Onoo
Tab C) .
ARGUMENT AND CITATION OF AUTHORITY
Summary judgment is improper "[i]f a reasonable
could draw more than one inference from the facts,

inference creates a genuine issue of material
v . Town of Highland Lake ,

if
reasonable minds
undisputed
975
facts .
F .2d 1518,
1539
880 F .2d 348,
351
fact
finder
and that
fact," Cornelius
(11th Cir . 1989),
or
could differ on the inferences arising from

See Miranda v .
(111" Cir .
B&B Cash Grocery Store,
1992) .
- 10 -
Inc .,
In assessing the record,
the Court may not weigh evidence or make credibility

determinations .
Inc .,
267 F .3d 181
Defendants must
Durango Steakhouse of Brandon,
See Lipphardt v .
(11th Cir . 2001) .
To prevail,
show that there are no material
therefore,
issues
of
dispute or credibility questions for a jury to resolve .

Rule 56 merely requires Onoo to present "sufficient
evidence" to "require a jury or Judge to resolve the parties'
different
versions of
City Serv . Co . ,
I .
the truth at trial ."
391 U .S . 253,
First Nat'1 Bank v .
288-289 (1968) .
ONOO IS ENTITLED TO A JURY TRIAL BECAUSE HE HAS PRODUCED

OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE OF INTENTIONAL DISCRIMINATION .
Defendants imply that Onoo is restricted to proving
discrimination under the methodology set forth in McDonnell

Douglas Corp .
v.
Green ,
411 U .S .
792,
798
(1973) .
Defendants'
position is misplaced because a plaintiff is not restricted to

one method of proving a case .
As stated by the Supreme Court,
the McDonnell Douglas framework is "merely a sensible, orderly

way to evaluate the evidence in light of common experience as it
bears on the critical question of discrimination ."

States Postal
715 (1983)
Service Bd .
of Governors v .
Aikens ,
(citations and quotations omitted) .
United
460
U .S .
711,
In other words,
the McDonnell Douglas methodology is an aid to a plaintiff to

show the court that the plaintiff has sufficient evidence
- 11
for a
jury trial .
838,
See,
(9th Cir .
855
e .g . ,
2002)
Costa v .
Desert
Place,
Inc . ,
299
('nothing compels the parties
F .3d
to invoke
McDonnell Douglas ") .

A.
0N00 IS ENTITLED TO A JURY TRIAL BECAUSE HE HAS

ESTABLISHED DIRECT EVIDENCE THAT WCW DISCRIMINATED
AGAINST HIM BECAUSE OF HIS RACE .
Russo's blatantly racially biased and discriminatory
remarks made publicly and privately,

"the existence of
[Russo's]
conclusively establishes
discriminatory intent behind its
firing Onoo firing "without any inference or presumption ."

Standard v . ABEL Serv .,
1998) .
Inc . ,
161 F .3d 1318,
(11th Cir .
Indeed, if the fact-finder credits the testimony of Mr .
Hassman,
former Vice
prevails .
President of WCW Enterprises,
Hassman states :
[Russo]
was
against Japanese and Hispanic talent

8,
1330
Tab A) .
Onoo
obviously stating a bias
."
(Hassman Aff . at 9[
Moreover, Russo told Bill Busch and other decision-
Although Onoo similarly seeks relief under 92 U .S .C . 1981 as well as Title

VII of the Civil Rights Acts, as amended, Onoo is entitled to recover under
either statute because of discrimination against him for being Japanese
and/or Asian .
See St . Francis College v . A1-khazraji , 981 U .S . 609, 613
(1987)
(plaintiff could prove he was subjected to intentional discrimination
under 1981, where he was an "Arab," as opposed to proving that he was
discriminated solely on the place of national crigin) ; see also Brown v .
American Honda Motor Co . , 939 F .2d 996, 949 (11`" Cir . 1991) ("the aim of the
statute is to remove the impediment of discrimination from a minority
citizen's ability to participate fully and equally in the market place") ;
Donaire v . NME Hospital, Inc . , 27 F .3d 507, 509 (11~" Cir . 1994)
("we reject
the conclusion that Philipinos cannot be a protected class under Section
1981 ; "a plaintiff's allegation that he or she was subjected to intentional
discrimination because of his or her `ancestry or ethnic characteristics'
satisfies the pleading requirements of Section 1981")
(citations omitted) .
- 12
"WCW should get
makers that
rid of Asian talent because he was
not going to use the Asian/Japanese stars .

Russo's statements are direct evidence because the
statements
on
reveal his racial bias and his intent
that bias against
"Asian" or "Japanese" talent,
inference or further inquiry .
990 U .S . 220
(1989)
for WCW to act

without any
See Price Waterhouse v .
Hopkins
(finding direct evidence where a decision-
maker believed that women were not capable of functioning as
senior managers) ; Haynes v . WC Kaye and Co . , 52 F .3d 928,

(11`h Cir .
1995)
(finding direct evidence where decision-maker
stated that "women were
simply not tough enough" and that "it
would require a man to do the job") ;

F .2d
1549,
1555
930-31
(11th Cir .
1990)
Caban-Wheeler v .
Elsea ,
904
(finding discrimination where
decision-makers stated that the program "needed a black

director") .
Lastly, Russo and other WCW decision-makers

Taylor)
constantly and frequently used racial
Sullivan at 51, 56,

Tab T ;
Satullo Aff . ;
(such as
slurs,
(See
58 ; Kearce at 39 ; Snakovsky Aff . at 9[9[ 5,

Bayens
at 67-69),
6,
including "Jap" and
"Gook," which further demonstrates direct evidence of

discrimination .
(11th Cir . 1985)
See Miles v .
MNC Corp . ,
750
E.
2d 867,
873-76
(characterizing evidence of racially derogatory
remarks as direct evidence) .
- 13 -
Although Defendants may attempt to argue that Russo's

comments
only relate to
such a distinction is
"wrestlers" and not
"wrestling talent,"
legally and factually inaccurate .
directives were clear : "get rid of Asian talent ."

at 9[ 11,
a
Tab A) .
Moreover,
fundamental belief that
classification were not

were Caucasians ,
1394 n .7
(Hassman Aff .
because Russo's remarks demonstrate
"Japanese" as an entire racial
as suited for the wrestling shows as
Onoo has established direct evidence that WCW
discriminated against him .
1390,
Russo's
(11th Cir .
Burrell v .
1997)
Bd .
of Trustees,
125
F .3d
("[s]uch statements because of
their breadth -- may obviate the need for inferences about the
speaker's motivation for a wide category of employment
decisions") ;
see also EEOC v . Alton Packaging Corp . ,
920,
(11th Cir . 1990)
924 n .6
901
F .2d
(decision-makers comments
constituted direct evidence where the statements indicated "a

decidedly negative attitude toward black people") .
Russo's statements could not be more clear :
a shit
about a Japanese guy
"I don't give
I'm from America ."
(Tab B) .
Similarly,
Russo clearly stated that Japanese "won't sell in
America ."
(Hassman Aff .
Accordingly,
v . Runyon ,
Onoo
at 1 9,
Tab A) .
is entitled to a jury trial .
175 F .3d 861,
866
(11th Cir . 1999)
- 14 -
See
Taylor
(stating that
judgment as a matter of law is not appropriate where non-movant
presents direct evidence of discrimination) .

0N00 IS ALSO ENTITLED TO A JURY TRIAL BECAUSE HE CAN
EASILY ESTABLISH DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE MCDONNELL
DOUGLAS METHOD OE PROOF
8 .
1 .
Onoo Can Establish a

Discrimination .
Prima Facie Case of
Although Defendants argue that Onoo cannot make out a

"prima facie case," Defendants misconstrue Onoo's claims,
well
as
as the applicable law .

Defendant's argument that Onoo cannot meet his prima
case of discrimination,
is incorrect .
Court,
facie
under the McDonnell Douglas methodology
As established by the United States Supreme
the prima facie case method established in McDonnell
Douglas ,
was
ritualistic ."
Aikens ,
`never
intended to be rigid,
United States
460 U .S .
711,
715
mechanized or
Postal Service Bd .
of Governors
v.
(1983) .
Notwithstanding Defendants' suggestion that no one was

similarly situated,
comparators who,
6) .z
Onoo has identified several Caucasian
like Onoo, were "on-air" talent .
If the Court wishes
(See DB at
to further define Onoo's entertainment
The Court should note the huge inconsistency in Defendants' position .

When
it comes to firing Onoo, he is categorized with all "talent ."
But when it
comes to Onoo's initial burden, Defendants want to limit the universe to
persons who were "identical" to Onoo .
- 15 -
the most accurate description of Onoo's role
role,
(Onoo Aff .
air non-wrestling talent ."
at 49f 3,
is as
17,
27,
an "onTab C) .
Onoo easily establishes his prima facie case because WCW

retained similarly situated Caucasian Jimmy Hart,
performed as an "on-air non-wrestling talent"
various administrative and other duties
1 20) .
Indeed,
similar to Hart,
for appearing on air,

talent ."
and performed
for WCW .
Onoo was not
who like Onoo,
(Onoo Aff .
at
only responsible
but also for "recruiting and developing
(Williams Aff . at 91 28, Tab D) .
Although Hart may
have had more years of wrestling experience than Onoo,
Onoo
provided additional services to WCW that Hart did not provide -translating for Hispanic and Asian wrestlers who did not speak
English well enough .
(Williams Aff .
at 1 28,
Tab D) .
In sum,
Onoo and Hart were similarly situated because they both appeared
as
on air as managers,
developing talent,
well .
(Onoo Af .
were responsible
and were
at 1 20,
for recruiting and
involved in administrative duties as

Tab C ;
Williams Aff .
at 9[
28,
Tab D) .
In addition to Hart, Onoo was similarly situated to several

other male on-air non-wrestling talent, who were used by WCW
after WCW fired Onoo :
(1)
Eric Bischoff who was rehired by WCW
to perform on air talent services
(Tab G at
(demonstrating
that
Bischoff would perform "on camera services" ;
53) ;
(2) John Riker ("Ralphus")
(Tab H at 15)
- 16 -
Kearce
Dep .
at
(listing "Ralphus
as Enhancement - Other ;
that
Kearce at
55-56 ;
Lunde at
12
(testifying
Ralphus appeared on air with Caucasian wrestler Chris
Jericho) ;
(3)
Ed Ferrara
(Lunde at
99)
(testifying that
appeared on air as a character known as Oklahoma) ;

(Lunde at
13)
Mike
Ferrara
Sanders
(worked as a wrestler and as on-air talent manager
for the Natural Born Thrillers) ;

Onoo can
and
(5)
Jeremy Borash
(Tab BB) .'
further establish his prima facie case because he
had also worked as a wrestling agent,
(Bischoff at 30)
also continued to use agents after Onoo was

wrestling agents essentially coordinated,
fired .
and WCW
WCW
and communicated the
need of the producers of the program to the talent and assist

wrestlers
in executing script .
(Bischoff at 29 ;
Ferrara at
Although Onoo had functioned in a role as an agent for WCW

addition to working as an on-air talent
30),
after Sonny Onoo was terminated,
Ferrara
(Ferrara at
7,
26),
"manager"),
Laurinatis,
Thus,
David Finley,
Terry Taylor,
in
Arn Anderson,
Johnny Ace,
John
Id .
Onoo has established a prima

especially
(Bischoff at
as well as the following agents
and Ricky Santana .
discrimination,
(in
WCW continued to use Ed
after Onoo's termination through the end of WCW :

Mike Graham,
26) .
light of
facie case of
complete
lack
of
minority
Further illustrative of WCW's desire to continue person in the on-air

management role, WCW also was "interested" in using Caucasian wrestler Roddy
Piper in a "manager" capacity .
(Tab AA) .
- 17 -
on-air talent after Russo,
and in light of Defendants'
subjective decision-making process . See Crawford v . Wester

Electric Co .,
614 F .2d 1300,
1315-1320 (5`" Cir . 1980)
(plaintiffs established prima facie case where subjective

criteria was used and plaintiffs'
evidence showed Caucasians
were generally advanced more readily) ; see also , Pace v .

Southern Ry . System , 701 F .2d 1383,
1388
(1983)
(the "overall
assessment of whether a prima facie has been established"

depends on "the particular facts of a given case") .
2 .
The Court should reject Defendants' nondiscriminatory reasons that are not supported by
a "clear and reasonably specific" factual basis .
Although Onoo recognizes that
production
a defendant
a defendant's burden of
(in identifying non-discriminatory reasons)

is nevertheless
is light,
required to identify its non-
discriminatory reasons and support them with a "clear and

reasonably specific" factual basis .
Affairs v . Burdine ,
450 U .S . 248,
258
Texas Dep t of Community

(1981) .
The Supreme Court's requirement of a "clear and reasonably

specific" non-discriminatory reason is critical because a court
needs "objective factors that can be tested against other
testimony and evidence ."
Chapman v .
1012,
2000) .
Court,
1034 n .25
(11t" Cir .
A .I .
Transport ,
229
As set forth by the
in Texas Dep t of Community Affairs v .
- 18 -
Burdine,
F .3d
Supreme
450
U .S .
298,
258
(1981), Onoo must be entitled to a "full and fair
opportunity" to demonstrate pretext .

Defendants essentially assert the following two reasons
for
their adverse treatment of Onoo :

1 .
2.
WCW was purportedly experiencing a "business downturn" in

1999 and "had less need for non-essential wrestling talent"
("business downturn") (DB at 14) ; and
Onoo "was not, and did not have the potential to be a major
contributing factor to maintaining or growing ratings for
WCW . 11
The Court should reject Defendants'
because Defendants'
"business downturn"
contention that it has "less" need for "non-
essential" wrestling talent is too subjective to rebut .
Because
Defendants have failed to identify what constitutes "essential"

as compared to "non-essential," Onoo has not been afforded the
opportunity to rebut
Furthermore,
such a vague reason .'
Defendants' contention regarding "non-
essential" merely begs the question as to who and who was not
talented as determined by racially biased decision-makers with
no established criteria .
F .2d 398,
359
(5th Cir .
See Rowe v .
1972) .
General Motors Corp .,
In any event,
957
because Defendants
do not articulate any factual basis to support their subjective

conclusion of "non-essential," this Court has no guarantee that
" If anything, based on Russo's statements, "non-essential" was apparently

equated with Japanese wrestlers whom Russo didn't want on his wrestling
shows .
- 19 -
there is any factual support for Defendants'
contention that
Onoo was "non-essential ."

Similarly,
the Court should reject Defendants'
that Onoo "was not,
contention
and did not have the potential to be a major
contributing factor to maintaining or growing ratings," because

such a
conclusion has no factual
support
(because it
is patently
false) .
Also,
rebut,
Onoo has not been afforded a full opportunity to
because Defendants failed to identify Busch,
principal decision-maker,
Summary Judgment .
Indeed,
Interrogatories as to the
Defendants
p rior to filing their Motion for

in their initial Responses to Onoo's
identity of Onoo's decision-maker,
identified Eric Bischoff .
(See Defendants'
to Consolidated Third Interrogatory Number 8,
Tab I)
purpose for Onoo's interrogatory requests was
for
identify the decision-maker as to his
Because Defendants
Responses
The
Defendants
termination so that he
could adequately inquire into the purported reasons

actions .
as the
for WCW's
failed to identify Busch by
supplementing their responses, and failed to fulfill their
- 20 -
to
continuing obligation to identify Busch,
Onoo
should not have
to
rebut Busch's statements at a11 .5

Furthermore,
reason because
the Court should disregard Busch's purported
it essentially is based on his
that Onoo did not have
subjective opinion
"potential" to affect WCW's ratings .
If
this Court accepts Defendants contention, any employer can take

adverse action merely because it deems that an employee does not
have the "potential" to be successful in the future , regardless
of demonstrable success .
As a matter of law,
the Court should
reject Defendants' meaningless assertion that Onoo did not have

"potential" without any factual basis to support such a
conclusion .
n .25
See Chapman v . A .I . Transport , 229 F .3d 1012,
(11th Cir .
2000)
(noting that a defendant cannot obtain
summary judgment by merely stating,

appearance," without
Firestone,
1034
"I did not
further explanation) ;
893 F .2d 1189,
1194
(11th Cir .
like his
see also ,
1990)
IMPACT v .
(a "mere
statement that employer hired the `best qualified person'
leaves
no opportunity for the employee to rebut the given reason as a

pretext") .
Accordingly,
reasons
this Court should reject
Defendants'
and hold that Onoo's prima facie case
purported
is unrebutted .
s If anything Onoo was lad to believe that Busch merely rubber-stamped Onoo's
decision as Defendant WCW stated Bischoff's decision was "affirmed" by Busch
and Russo .
(Id .) .
- 21 -
Onoo has demonstrated that any purported nondiscriminatory reasons are pretext for race
discrimination .
3.
a .
WCW's business downturn justification is

pretext .
Defendants contend that WCW was

downturn
in
late
1999,
responding to a "business
which justifies its
firing Onoo and
terminating contracts of several minority talent .

Defendants'
(DB at 19) .
suggestion that WCW cut its payroll because of
the downturn in its business in 1999 is very questionable .

fact,
In
according to John E . Kampfe, the Senior Vice President and
Chief Accounting Officer for TBS,
WCW lost millions
of dollars
on an annual basis "from the day Ted Turner bought it .

until roughly 1997, 1998 time frame ."
As of June 30,
, up
(See Kampfe at 14-15) .
1997, TBS funded $76,607,338 of losses and asset
acquisitions by WCW .
(Id . at 113-119) .
WCW was profitable for
a very short period of time sometime between 1997 and 1999 and
then began to lose money again .
that period,
(Id .
at
15,
72-73) .
During
TBS financed WCW's losses because having access to
WCW programming allowed TBS's subsidiaries to "boast about its

ratings" because the WCW program "was the highest rated cable
show on television ."
(Id .
at
42) .
for access to WCW programming .
TBS financed WCW's losses
(Id, at 73-74)
- 22 -
WCW did not have
to worry about the cost of talent because TBS covered that cost,
and TBS never told WCW to cut its cost o talent .
Moreover,
far from cutting costs in 1999,
talent-buying binge .
Dr .
just
Harvey Schiller,
On March 31,
the
1999,
(Id .
WCW went
for a net
talent cost
Tab U) .
raises
Following those increases in costs,
13 new talents,
See Tab U .
(costing
(costing $115,000),
increase of $1,010,000 .
under budget for 1999 ."
on a
Sports that WCW had
entered into new contracts with two new wrestlers

and had given two wrestlers
(See
Pl .
Ex .
Ex .
76,
During May 1999, WCW added
gave two wrestlers raises, and terminated two
Tab V) .
Schiller that
75,
WCW was "$1,858,000
contracts for a net increase in talent cost of $58,719 .

P1 .
61) .
Diana Myers reported to
President of Turner
$895,000)
at
In her May report,
(See
Myers reported to
"we are currently $100,000 under budget for 1999 ."
(See Tab V) .
In August 1999, two months before Onoo was terminated, WCW

added six white wrestlers, gave raises to two white wrestlers,
and terminated six contracts,

$303,714 .
(See P1 . Ex . 44
the same time that Onoo was
for a net payroll increase of
(019225), Tab S) .
terminated,
In October 1999,
WCW added three white
wrestlers and gave raises to three white wrestlers,

another $966,719
to its payroll,
adding
while eliminating $1,943,000 in
payroll costs by terminating 12 contracts .

- 23 -
Over 35 percent of
that reduction came from terminating the contract of one of the

two highest paid blacks
in the WCW,
making $700,000 per year .

Thus,
Lash Huffman,
(See Tab S
who had been
(#019226) .
a reasonable jury could infer many things,
including
a proper inference that WCW merely used the "business downturn"

as an excuse for firing minority talent
(even if it also
terminated some non-minority talent to disguise its

discriminatory plan) .
Thus,
"business downturn"
is merely
pretext for discrimination .

b.
Defendants have been unable to even identify

the principal decision-maker as to Onoo's
termination
Defendants are not entitled to summary judgment because

Defendants cannot
even identify the person whom they contend
made the decision to
fire Onoo .
Although Russo was clearly the decision-maker,
Defendants
have done everything possible to distance Russo from Onoo's

termination .
In its
Interrogatories,
response to Plaintiffs'
Consolidated Third
WCW stated that "Eric Bischoff made the
decision to terminate Sonny Onoo's contract with WCW and that

decision was affirmed by Bill Busch and Vince Russo ."
(Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Consolidated Third
- 24 -
Interrogatories Number 8,
Diana Myers,
termination .
Tab I) .6
testified that
(Myers at
Bischoff, however,
Onoo's termination .
In
Similarly, WCW's counsel,
Bischoff recommended Onoo's
131) .
testified that he had nothing to do with

fact,
he had approved of a talent
roster
listing Onoo as a talent to be used in an upcoming WCW event

immediately prior to Onoo's termination .
243,
Tab J) .
he left WCW,
Bischoff stated that the decision was made after

and Bischoff did not even recall discussions about
the decision to terminate Sonny Onoo .

Thus,
(Bischoff at 218 ; 240-
(Bischoff at 218-219) .
because Bischoff denied terminating Onoo,
and because
Defendants now belatedly identify Busch as the decision-maker, a

reasonable jury could easily infer that Defendants' purported
reason is "unworthy of credence," especially in light of Russo's
involvement
and Defendants'
inability to consistently identify
anyone other than Russo .
fi In response to Interrogatory No . 17, however, Defendants state that "Bill

Busch or Eric Hischoff" decided which performers contracts would be
terminated .
In contrast to that general assertion, Defendants specifically
stated that Bischoff was Onoo's decision-maker .
Because Onoo reasonably
relied on Defendants' responses, and because Defendants clearly identified
Bischoff, Defendants cannot belatedly change the decision-maker, who in turn
belatedly proffers an entirely new non-discriminatory reason .
- 25 -
Defendants have been unable to consistently

identify their purported non-discriminatory
reason(s) .
c.
Similar to Defendants'
inability to consistently identify
the purported decision-maker,
Defendants have not even been able
to consistently articulate their non-discriminatory reason(s) .

Thus,
Defendants'
belated explanations
as to why WCW did not
promote and push Onoo is replete with internal inconsistencies

and contradictions,
pretext
further demonstrating that
for discrimination .
100 F .3d . 1061,
1072
and implausibilities,
Sheridan v .
E .I .
its reasons are

Dupont de Nemours
(11t" Cir . 1997)(noting that "weaknesses,

inconsistencies,
incoherencies,
or
contradictions" in Defendants' reasons could lead a reasonable

fact-finder to find them "unworthy of credence") .
1.
Defendants Changed Their non-discriminatory Reasons
In their Initial Responses to the Court's Mandatory

Disclosures,
Defendants stated that WCW "stopped creating roles
for wrestling managers in the story lines ."

Response to Disclosures at 7,
Defendants,
altogether" ;
Tab K) .
Indeed,
according to
"WCW stopped using traditional wrestler managers

after "that time,
wrestlers appeared either alone
or with certain female on-camera talent ."

Relying on these assertions,
that
(Defendants'
after his termination,
Id .
Onoo successfully established
WCW used many males in a
- 26 -
"managerial" role
on the
(i .e .,
appear in connection with the wrestlers
live WCW events as did Onoo)
(see supra at pp .
And now that discovery has expired,

demonstrated that Defendants'
14-18) .
and after Onoo
initial purported non-
discriminatory reason was "unworthy of credence,"' Defendants now

belatedly state that Onoo somehow "was not and did not have the
potential to be a major contributing factor" for WCW's ratings .
because Defendants have shifted their non-discriminatory
Thus,
reasons,
summary judgment
Oil Co . ,
32 E .3d 520,
is inappropriate .
526-528
inconsistency in testimony,
sufficient doubt on
(11t" Cir .
See Howard v .
1999)
BP
(noting that
without any written criteria,
"casts
[defendant's] explanation for its choice of
dealers to create a genuine issue of material fact to place

before a jury") .
d.
Onoo has demonstrated pretext because Onoo

was a major contributing factor to WCW's
Shows
Defendants essentially seek summary judgment because Bill

Busch,
without pointing to any factual support,
states that Onoo
Incidentally, the Court should note that Defendants also initially justified
Onoo's termination by stating (euphemistically) that WCW had a "change in
WCW's international business endeavors ."
(Defs . Disclosures at 7, Tab K) .
A
reasonable jury could conclude that the "change" was that Russo simply didn't
want Japanese people in his wrestling business .
- 27 -
somehow "was
not" and did not have
contributing factor
"the potential to be"
for WCW's ratings .
(DS at
a major
14) .
As to Busch's conclusion that Onoo "was not" a major

contributor to WCW's ratings,
the Court need only read
Defendants' pleadings to conclude that Defendants do not

genuinely believe this assertion .
For example,
acknowledge that by 1998
appearing in most WCW events
"
(DB at
6) .
"Onoo was
Similarly,
on January 15,
Defendants
1999,
WCW offered
Onoo a two-year contract with a guaranteed salary of $160,000 .

(Tab L) .
Also, WCW used Onoo constantly even during the time
that Bill Busch was an important WCW official, and right up

until Russo arrived .
(Onoo at 11 22, 23) .
jury could easily infer,

that
Onoo was a
Thus,
based on Defendants'
a reasonable
pleadings alone,
"major contributing factor" to growing WCW
ratings .
Moreover,
highest
Onoo has unequivocal proof that he scored the
rating in his category immediately prior to his
termination .
(Onoo at
52) .
In or around September,
1999,
a WCW
official gave Onoo the "WCW Personality Familiarity and

Likeability Ratings ."
(Onoo at
51,
52 ;
Tab M) .
The Research Company that generated the

Familiarity and Likeability Ratings,
- 28 -
Personality
instructed WCW to "keep in
mind that a high negative R score isn't necessarily bad ."
(Tab
M at 3) .
Indeed,
Onoo,
who played a bad guy for WCW,
score high on the " negative

the "heel ."
R" score .
was supposed to
Onoo played a role called
The "heels" are essential because they serve as the
antagonist to the protagonists - the baby faces .

"bad guys"
The "heels" or
served a crucial role to generate "heat ."
(Onoo Aff .
at 9f 27) .
Thus, Onoo scored the highest rating among all persons who
had a "Negative Recognition" -(i .e .,
the heels) .
Onoo received
a "Negative Rating," of 49, which was the highest of all the

talent who registered as a Negative persona ."
Indeed, Onoo
registered a higher rating than many Caucasian "heels," which

had much higher compensation .
For example,
Onoo had a higher
negative rating than wrestling "heel" Scott Rechsteiner

Steiner")
who made approximately $663,898 .99
in
1999 .
("Scott
(See
Defendants Supplemental Responses to Consolidated First

Interrogatories at Exhibit A, Tab N) .
Similarly, Onoo registered a "familiar" rating of 98, which
was even higher than Caucasians such as Steven Regal
considerably more than Onoo in 1997) .
consistent
with the general
his role .
(Schiavone at 92-45) .
(Id .) .
Onoo's rating was
consensus that he was
- 29 -
(who made
"very good" in
Moreover,
t"
Busch himself congratulated Onoo for Onoo's
excellent rating .
(Onoo at 42) .
The fact that Busch was
congratulatory about Onoo's high rating,
is alone sufficient to
demonstrate that Busch's alleged concern about Onoo and ratings

is merely pretext .
because a reasonable jury could easily
Accordingly,
conclude that Onoo did contribute greatly to WCW's ratings,

Defendants'
and
assertions are "unworthy of credence ."

e .
Additional evidence of pretext - WCW stopped

Using Asian Wrestlers when Russo was making
decisions .
Onoo further establishes pretext based on the fact that the

Asian wrestlers were adversely treated under Russo,
constitutes "additional evidence of pretext ."
Rhodes Furniture,
Inc .,
196 F .3d 1286, 1290
Kevin Sullivan testified that he

wrestlers on his
Creative
Director,
wrestlers] ."
Kearce,
at
162) .
See Ross v .
(11th Cir . 1998) .
(Sullivan)
show, but that when Mr .
was using Asian
Russo became the
"he didn't do anything with them
(Sullivan at 70) .
which
[Asian
According to Assistant Producer
Russo sent most of the Asian wrestlers "back ."

Thus,
(Kearce
soon after Vince Russo became Creative Director,
WCW also stopped using completely,
or greatly diminished the
biggest Japanese wrestling stars such as Mr . Asai
- 30 -
(Ultimo
who was fired .
Dragon),
(Onoo at
76-77) .
As to another well-
The Great Muta, Russo stated,
known wrestler,
"the office is
making me use this guy," apparently because of a contractual

obligation .
But
"after that was done," they didn't
Great Muta any longer .

Hayashi,
(Williams at
26-257) .
use the
As to Kaz
he was used during Russo's absence by Jimmy Hart,
his role greatly diminished when Russo returned .
(Williams at
259) .
According to Williams, WCW "shafted [Kaz Hayashi]
bad ."
(Id .) .
shifts
in WCW's use of the Asian wrestlers .
Also,
cruiser weight wrestlers,

191-192,
Accordingly,
pretty
announcer Schiavone recalls significant
Thus,
with Russo's booking philosophies,
(Kearce at
but
(Schiavone
at
70) .
WCW stopped using its
who were primarily Asian and Mexican .
162) .
the
fact that WCW acted upon Russo's
discriminatory bias further demonstrates pretext as to Onoo's

claims .
See also ,
Tab E
('which Mexicans have we released by
sending letters") .
f.
Even
Additional Evidence of Pretext - Russo's and

WCW's Decision-Makers Bias Against Asian
and/or Japanese .
if the Court somehow does not find that Russo's
racial slurs and blatantly racist comments do not constitute

direct evidence,
the Court must nevertheless
consider all
slurs and remarks because they amply demonstrate pretext .
- 31 -
such
Russo's remarks clearly demonstrate a bias in favor of

Caucasians and against Asian
persons .
(See sup ra) .
(and specifically Japanese)
At the very least,
these statements
preclude summary judgment because they amply demonstrate that

the proffered reasons are pretext for discrimination .
Fleming Supermarkets of Florida,
Cir .
1999)
Inc . 196 F .3d 1354,
Damon v .
(11th
1361
(holding that although statements regarding a
discriminatory animus toward older managers did not constitute
direct evidence, the evidence did constitute "probative

circumstantial evidence of age discrimination") .
In addition to Russo's blatant discriminatory remarks,
Onoo
has established that WCW's other principal decision-makers also

used racial slurs against Japanese and Asian persons .
example,
Terry Taylor often called Sonny Onoo a
referred to Sonny Onoo as a "gook ."

T;
Bayens at
67-69) .
Similarly,
even
For
"Jap," and also
(Snakovsky Aff .
Diana Myers,
at 9[ 3 ;
WCW's counsel
called Sonny Onoo a "gook" at or about the time that he was

terminated from WCW .
constitute
(Tab O) .
Thus,
these racial slurs
further evidence of pretext .
In addition to
establishing a "prima facie" case, this evidence further

demonstrates pretext .
- 32 -
Tab
f_
g.
Additional evidence of pretext - WCW

continues to use on-air non-wrestling
talent .
As set forth supra ,
WCW continued to use a variety of
Caucasians in "on-air" non-wrestling roles .
In addition to
demonstrating Onoo's prima facie case, such disparate treatment

further shows pretext .
Accordingly,
even if this Court applies McDonnell Douglas
Defendants are not entitled to summary judgment because Onoo has

established an abundance of evidence from which a reasonable
jury could that WCW discriminated against him .
of Community Affairs v .
Burdine ,
450
U .S .
248,
See Texas Dep t

255
(1981)
(plaintiff is entitled to "directly persuade" the Court that a

"discriminatory reason more
likely motivated" adverse
treatment) .
h .
WCW refused to merchandise Onoo's

paraphernalia .
Although WCW merchandised items for Caucasian Jimmy Hart,

WCW refused to market any merchandise for Onoo,
demonstrating pretext .
II .
(Onoo Aff .
further
at 9f 32) .
ONOO IS ENTITLED TO A JURY TRIAL BECAUSE AE HAS ESTABLISHED

EVIDENCE OF ILLEGAL RACE-BASED WRESTLING DECISIONS
It is well settled that race-based decision-making is

illegal under Section 1981,
regardless of the specific intent,
- 33 -
or
racial animus,
of the decision-makers .
Opportunity Commission v .
1284
Supp .
Joe's Stone Crab,
(11`h Cir . 2000) ; Mil ler v . Bed,

2d 1253,
1254-65
Equal Employment
(N . D .
Ala .
Inc .,
220 F .3d 1263,
Bath & Beyond,
2002)
("[I]t
Inc . ,
185 F .
is well
established that making work assignments along the lines of race

or color is forbidden .
.") .
WCW's race-based decision-making denied Onoo appearances

and opportunities .
to appear on
For example,
he was denied the opportunity
Family Feud because WCW wanted "southern wrestling
representation ."
(Onoo at
130-133) .
Accordingly,
of the evidence of race-based decision-making,
based on all
Onoo has
established ample evidence that Defendants were engaging in

illegal practices .
P .3d 468,
III .
See Ferrill v . The Parker Group,
Inc . ,
168
972-475 (11th Cir . 1999) .
ONOO IS ENTITLED TO A JURY TRIAL AS TO HIS HOSTILE WORK

ENVIRONMENT CLAIM .
The Court should not grant summary judgment as
to Onoo's
hostile work environment claim because his work environment was

permeated with racial insult and racial humiliation .
Onoo
is not
Although
suggesting that every person at WCW contributed to
the hostile environment against Asians or Japanese,
sufficient
number of WCW officials contributed to his environment to make

it sufficiently severe .
- 34 -
For a general background as to the comprehensive racial

components of WCW's working environment, which was permeated
with racial insult and offensive behavior by Caucasians against
minorities
such as African-American,
extent Hispanics
Asian,
and to a
lesser
(who were not considered "American" Hispanics),
Onoo incorporates by reference the responsive pleadings filed by

African-American Plaintiffs Norris and Walker .
The evidence shows that Russo,
Diana Myers used "Jap" and "gook ."
Aff .
at 1 3,9,
Tab 0) .
and even WCW counsel
(See sup ra ;
see also Satullo
Also, wrestlers such as Ric Flair used
terms as "Jap" and "Jap Slap ."

163) .
Taylor,
(Sullivan 50-51,
73 ; Myers at
The fact that Onoo was not privy to each and every racial
slur against Asians and Japanese as well as
of the epithets were not directed at
"the fact
[the plaintiff]
that many
is not
determinative" of whether a work atmosphere is polluted with

racial
785
discrimination .
Busby v .
City of Orlando ,
931
F .2d 764,
(11th Cir . 1991) .

Also,
Onoo was mocked by another WCW actor who mocked Onoo
by portraying martial arts moves incorrectly and "bowing
incessantly ."
(Onoo at 93)
The "Chinese menu"
work environment at WCW .
(Tab P)
further demonstrates the hostile
As explained by Moses Williams, the
"Chinese menu," which portrayed Chinese in a very negative

- 35 -
manner," was
another "example" of the atmosphere at WCW,
which
tolerated and perpetuated racial stereotypes and racial

prejudices ."
Defendants'
(Williams Aff .
at 4
29,
Tab D) .
Although
witness Monica Jennings states that Onoo "laughed"
about the Chinese menu, Onoo did not laugh because he found the
In an utter sigh of disbelief,
menu humorous .
Onoo laughingly
mocked WCW's complete inability to do anything to protect racial
minorities .
(Onoo at 1 26, Tab C) .
Moreover,
because Onoo was
subjected to a hostile work
environment by his supervisors,
including Russo and Taylor,
Defendants have no defense .
Indeed, even if this Court finds
that Onoo's "co-workers" rather than supervisors created the

hostile work environment,
Defendants are also liable because
they can make no showing that they took any actions whatsoever
to "prevent and correct promptly" the racially harassing harm

inflicted on Onoo .
Faragher v .
City of Boca Raton ,
529 U .S .
775,
808
IV .
ONOO IS ENTITLED TO A JURY TRIAL AS TO HIS RETALIATION

CLAIM
1 .
(1998) .
Onoo's Complaints
The evidence reveals
that Onoo made numerous complaints to
Turner's designated human resource person,
- 36 -
Tim Goodly,
as well
as WCW's attorney, Diana Myers regarding WCW's discriminatory

practices .
(Onoo at 70-72,
75-77,
191-142) .
When Onoo attended the diversity training session in

Baltimore,
Maryland,
he pointed out to Mr .
Goodly that all of
the talk about "diversity" was meaningless because WCW was

discriminatory and was operated exclusively by Caucasians .
Onoo
analogized to Goodly that WCW's exclusive Caucasian decisionmaking process to an automobile manufacturer that
exclusively by southern whites . e
is operated
Onoo also complained to Mr .
Goodly about the insulting and discriminatory portrayal of .

as an Asian person and Mr .
Miller on a
live show in 1999 .
Onoo
(Onoo
at 70-72) .
As
Ms .
to Diana Myers,9 Onoo complained on several occasions
to
Myers that WCW was treating the Japanese and Mexican talent
differently than they were treating the Caucasian-American

wrestlers .
(Onoo at 75-77 ;
complained to Diana Myers
80-82) .
For example,
Onoo
(very soon before he was fired)
about
the discriminatory manner in which she treated a Japanese
Incidentally, Onoo's analysis was legally correct .

The courts have readily
found discriminatory practices in organizations where, as here, the
organization is run exclusively by Caucasian decision-makers who base
decisions on purely subjective reasoning .
See Fowe v . General Motors Corp . ,
457 F .2d 348 (5'h Cir . 1972) .
y Because Mr . Sullivan informed Onoo that Russo, Myers and Busch all
participated in the decision, Myers is a decision-,maker as to Cnoc .
191-192) .
- 37 -
(Onoo at
wrestler,
Ultimo
(Onoo at 75-77) .
Dragon .
Ms .
Myers responded
that Ultimo
Dragon was "a Japanese guy who lives in Mexico ;
in the hell
is he going to sue us?
attorneys ."
We have a
how
room full of
Onoo immediately told her that he found her remarks
offensive because he also was Japanese .
(Id .) .
Onoo also complained to Ms . Myers about the manner in which

she allowed WCW to breach its promises to several Japanese
These particular Japanese wrestlers had been told
wrestlers .
that they would be hired by WCW,
and they were awaiting their
work visas .
later decided that WCW would
not
Ms .
Myers,
however,
fulfill its commitments to these Japanese wrestlers .
Onoo
explained that she was discriminating against these Japanese

wrestlers because they were foreign talent .
(Onoo at 80-82) .10
"we don't need anymore Japanese ."

2 .
Ms . Myers replied
Adverse Actions
The evidence suggests that Onoo may have

response to his complaints to Ms .
complaint to Ms . Myers
Myers .
also been fired in
Because his
last
(in reference to the discriminatory
treatment of Asian wrestler Ultimo Dragon) occurred immediately
1 The Court should note that Ms . Myers' statement that "we don't need anymore
Japanese" further demonstrates her discriminatory bias against Japanese
talent at WCW .
At the very least, the statement further demonstrates
impermissible racial classifications of wrestlers, even if Myers was merely
"rubber-stamping" Russo's bias .
- 38 -
prior to his termination,

as to whether or not Ms .
genuine issues of material
fact exist
Myers influenced the decision-making
process to terminate Sonny Onoo, or refused to intervene despite

notice of Russo's bias,
based on a retaliatory animus ."
The evidence also shows that Ms .
Myers retaliated against
Onoo by refusing to allow him a full accounting for all amounts

due him in the New World Order CD that he was entitled to
receive .
Onoo
repeatedly requested a
full accounting,
failed to provide him with an adequate accounting .
but Myers
Onoo was not
compensated for all of the monies due him pursuant to the New
World Order CD deal .
Thus, Onoo has established that WCW took numerous adverse

actions which,
if considered collectively, clearly show a
pattern of retaliation against Onoo after he settled his first

discrimination suit
("first
191 F .3d 1453,
(1 1t Cir . 1998) .
V.
1456
suit") .
See Wideman v .
Wal-Mart ,
ONOO IS ENTITLED TO RELIEF UNDER TITLE VII

Defendants'
only argument regarding Title VII
does not apply because Onoo was an independent
is that it
contractor .
(DB .
" As set forth infra, Ms . Myers' testimony that Eric Hischoff decided to
terminate Sonny Onoo further raises the issue as to whether or not she
influenced the process .
And notwithstanding Defendants' responses to
Plaintiffs' Consolidated Third Interrogatories and Ms . Myers' testimony,
Kevin Sullivan informed . Onoo that the termination decision was made by Vince
Russo, Diana Myers and Bill Busch .
- 39 -
at 26) .
The actual facts surrounding Onoo's employment,
however,
demonstrate that he was not an independent contractor,
but an employee .
Title VII defines the term "employee" as "an individual
employed by an employer
. ."
92 U .S .C .
2000e(f) .
Where as
here, a statute fails to sufficiently identify the meaning of

"employee," courts are instructed to construe the definition
utilizing a common-law test .
Darden,
503 U .S . 318,
322-23
"employee" under ERISA) .
See Nationwide Mut .
Ins .
Co .
v.
(1992)(construing the meaning of
The Eleventh Circuit has adopted a
hybrid approach, which considers "[t]he economic realities of

the relationship viewed in light of general common law
principles of agency[ .]"
340-91
1488
(11t" Cir .
(11t Cir .
Associates,
1982) ;
See,
1993) ;
M .D .'s,
Cobb v .
Daughtrey v .
Garcia,
P .A .,
109
M . D .,
Sun
Papers ,
Honeywell,
v.
Inc . ,
Copenhaver,
F . 3d 1256,
1266
673
F .2d 337,
3
Bell
(11th Cir .
F .3d
&
1997) .
Eleventh Circuit precedent amply supports the position that Onoo

worked as a WCW employee .
The central issue in determining the putative employee's
status
is the employer's
right to control the manner and means
by which the work is accomplished .
3 F .3d at
Ins . Co . ,
1495-96 ;
Daughtrey v .
Honeywell,
Inc . ,
see also, Deal v . State Farm County Mut .
5 F .3d 117,
118
(5" Cir . 1993)(the right to control an

- 40 -
employee's conduct is the most important component of

determining whether one is an employee or an independent
contractor) .
and did,
WCW,
through it bookers,
dictate the manner
as on-air talent .
right to,
in which Onoo performed his duties
(Onoo at 103-109) .
"everything was scripted ."
always had the
Onoo testified that
Id .
WCW flatly misstates Onoo's deposition testimony with
respect to his degree of creative freedom by avowing that "Onoo

also independently decided which costumes or attire he would
wear
. which props to use .
those items himself ."
DB at 27
. and [that]
he purchased
(citing Onoo at 103-107) .
Even
a cursory review of Onoo's deposition testimony illustrates that
Onoo stated the opposite :

Q:
[W]hen you managed wrestlers as the character

Sonny Onoo, did you provide your own clothes?
A:
My costumes or my colorful
WCW .
.. .
Q:
So you went out and got them and then sought

reimbursement for the suits?
A:
Q:
Any other equipment or props or things you used

as part of your character besides the costumes
that you wore?
A:
Martial art equipment,
Q:
Where did you get those props?
was
instructed to do so,
- 41 -
suit was provided by
yes .
cameras,
props .
A:
Generally the prop department at the arena would

provide .
Q:
When they didn't provide it,

yourself?
A:
No,
did you get it
they would provide it for us .
(Onoo at 105-106) .
Thus,
contrary to Defendant's contentions and
misstatements,
Defendants not only controlled the manner in
which Onoo performed his scripted duties,
Defendants provided
the tools and equipment which Onoo utilized in performing his

duties
for Defendants .
company credit card,

security clearance
office, a computer,
list .
Indeed,
Defendant's
a security key,
(Tab Q) .
Also,
issued Onoo a
a business card,
and a
WCW provided Onoo with and
and maintained Onoo on the employee phone
(Id . ; Hassman Aff . at 1 21, Tab A) .

If the tasks the worker performs are integral
continuing business of the employer,

to be considered an employee .
(factor No .
integrated
8) .
to the
the worker is quite
See Sun Papers ,
673
likely
F .2d .
at
390
Onoo's duties as a wrestling manager are
into the business operations of WCW and the success
of WCW depends
those services .
to an appreciable degree upon the performance of

That is,
the business of WCW is wrestling and
the services performed by the entertainers it employs .

Harrell v . Diamond A Entertainment,
- 42 -
Inc . ,
992 F .Supp .
See
1393,
1352
(M . D .
Fla .
a topless
1997)
(FSLA analysis ;
nightclub as
Significantly,
duties
such as
duties .
the main attraction) .
Onoo was not able to delegate many of his
translating for wrestlers,
was an employee .
of the ICA,
exotic dancers are integral to
Darden 503 U .S .
at
323 .
which further show he

Also,
under the terms
Onoo was not permitted to delegate any of his
Wrestlers perform the required services personally,
and
are not permitted under any circumstances to delegate or subcontract their responsibilities .
In other words,
Onoo could not
choose to have someone else perform in his place .

Aff . at TI 18-20,
Moreover,
(See Onoo
Tab C) .
in addition to performing as on-air talent, Onoo
performed many administrative duties for Defendants, and was

included on Company e-mails regarding compensation .
(Tab F) .
Defendants exercised complete control Onoo's work schedule in

both cases by setting specific dates and times to appear at an
event and in the office,
and by threatening consequences
being late or missing a scheduled performance .
(Tab X),
for
Any
failure to comply with this policy would be considered a breach

of contract .
Few employers invoke this level of control .
It
also notable that Onoo received workers compensation benefits

when he injured his tooth during an event .
(Onoo at
257 ;
Tab
R) . This fact too contradicts Defendant's suggestion that Onoo

- 43 -
is
was not an employee .
Also, Onoo regularly worked directly for
WCW and was directed to dictate WCW's terms and conditions to

Japanese and Mexican talent .
Moreover,
as did Jimmy Hart,
also worked diligently in business affairs .
Onoo
Among other things
WCW officials instructed Onoo as to how to recruit and monitor
Hispanic and Japanese talent .

by dictating company policy,
WCW essentially controlled Onoo

and made Onoo represent WCW's
policies and procedures to the wrestlers .

20,
(Onoo Aff .
at 9f9[ 18-
Tab C) .
Defendants'
reliance on Ross v .
WCW ,
is misplaced .
The
plaintiff in Ross, a wrestler, did not even submit an opposition

that was accepted .
Entertainment,
Inc .,
945 F .Supp . 1550

entertainers
Conversely,
Harrell v .
and E .E .O .C .
(S . D . Fla .
1996),
v.
Diamond A
Dolphin Cruise Line e
analyzed the status of
in similar circumstances,
and determined in both
cases that the employer's right to control the manner in which

the entertainers performed,
indicated an employer-employee
relationship, notwithstanding the independent contractor label

used in the contract .
In short,
courts
virtually none of the factors considered by the
in evaluating this
issue militate in
favor or finding-
especially as a matter of law-that Onoo was an independent

contractor .
In fact,
the Eleventh Circuit in Garcia,
- 44 -
M . D .,
held
that where there are disputed facts concerning the amount of

control an employer exerted over a putative employee,
of whether
jury .
Id .
B.
the issue
the plaintiff is an employee should be decided by a

109
F .3d at 1267 .
Onoo Was Denied "Employee" Status Because of His Race"
Even if this Court concludes that Onoo was an independent
contractor, the Court should allow Onoo to proceed under Title

VII because he was denied employment status because of his race
or national origin .
Although Defendants seek to differentiate between Onoo and
Hart,
only a jury can decide why the Caucasian Hart was made an
employee,
and received severance benefits where Onoo was
fired
and denied the opportunity to receive those same benefits .

Indeed,
Onoo serve a very similar role as Hart's
performed as on air non-wrestling talent .
and assisted wrestlers .
( supra ) .
Both
Both also recruited
And both had many different
administrative duties performed at WCW's office .

9f9[ 18-20,
role .
Tab C) .
- 45 -
(Onoo Aff at
Thus,
only a jury can decide if
Onoo was denied employment
status because of his race or national origin,
in violation of
Title VII .
VI .
ONOO IS ENTITLED TO A JURY TRIAL ON 8I5 CONTRACTUAL CLAIMS

The Toshiba Contract
WCW breached its agreement to pay Onoo 20 of the overall

profit generated by a music CD entitled New World Order
("NWO"),
which was promoted and marketed in Japan by Toshiba (the

'Toshiba Contract") .
Amazingly, WCW's sole defense to Onoo's
claim for breach of the Toshiba Contract is that Onoo is unable

to identify the amount of profits generated by the CD,
despite
the fact that Onoo did not have access to this information .
(DB at 32 ;
(Onoo at 215) .
See
WCW's defense is disingenuous because
WCW repeatedly refused to provide Onoo an accounting of the CD's

profits,
despite Onoo's requests both pre-lawsuit and in
discovery .
(Onoo Aff . at 9f 29 ; see also ,
Defendants'
to Consolidated Third Interrogatories at Numbers 2,

6,
Tab I) .
in 1999,
Myers,
3 4,
5,
and
Specifically, on three separate occasions beginning
Onoo asked WCW's Vice President of Legal Affairs,
to give him an accounting of profits
at 219) .
Responses
from the CD .
Diane
(Onoo
Although Meyers promised to contact WCW's accounting
department and to get Onoo the information,
- 46 -
she did not .
Id .
Because the marketing of the CD (and thus profit information)

was governed by an agreement between Toshiba and WCW,
Onoo was
not privy to the profit reports produced by Toshiba for WCW .

(Onoo at 215) .
WCW certainly had an
Nonetheless,
implied duty
of good faith to share that information with Onoo
since it
served as the basis for determining Onoo's share under the

contract .
See generally Fowler v . Smith , 230 Ga . Appl 817,
820
(every contract includes the implied duty of good faith
(1998)
under Georgia law) .

accounting
profits
WCW's failure to provide Onoo any
(much less an accurate accounting)
supports Onoo's
Millwood Mouldings,
Inc .
of the CD's
claim for breach of contract .

v.
Wilson ,
176 Ga .
App .
845,
See
846
(1985)(party's failure to provide accurate information supports

recovery for breach of contract) .
WCW's post-lawsuit responses
to Onoo's
requests
for an
accounting of profits from the CD were equally unhelpful . In

fact,
WCW actually objected to the Onoo's Interrogatory which
requested that WCW "identify any and all

profits
[it]
royalties
and/or
received from Toshiba EMI CD called New World
Order," on the grounds that it seeks information that is not

reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible
evidence .
(See Defendant's Response to Plaintiffs'
Third Interrogatories Numbers
2-8,
Tab I) .
- 47 -
Consolidated
WCW's "hide the
ball" tactics,
violate its implied duty of good faith in the
Toshiba contract, and at the very least demonstrates a genuine

issue of fact precluding summary judgment .
Georgia Eye Institute,
Inc .,
See Boland v .
et al . , 235 Ga . App .
492,
495
(1998)(where there is some evidence that a party failed to
exercise good faith,
it is error to grant summary judgment) .
The Court should note that WCW cannot affirmatively show

that the CD did not generate any profit, or even disclose the
amount of profits generated .
Rather,
it merely offers the
conclusory statement that "to the best of WCW's knowledge,
Onoo
was paid any and all amounts for which he was entitled under the
Toshiba Deal ."
(DB at 33) .
Such conclusory statements are
wholly ineffective to satisfy Defendant's burden of

demonstrating the absence of any genuine issue of material fact
on the issue of whether it breached the Toshiba Deal .
The Tommy Boy Deal
WCW entered into an agreement with Tommy Boy Records to
distribute a music CD entitled "WCW Mayhem ."
included several
(Onoo at 221) .
songs from the NWO CD,
The WCW Mayhem CD
which Onoo had produced .
Under an agreement between Onoo and WCW
"Tommy Boy Contract"),
Onoo was entitled to 2s
(the
of total profits
generated by those songs which he produced for the NWO CD, and
which were also on the Mayhem CD .
- 48 -
(Onoo at 221-22) .
In support of its request that this claim be dismissed on

summary judgment,
WCW avers that :
contain any songs from the NWO CD ;
(1)
and
to or involved with the Mayhem CD .

is
the Mayhem CD does not

(2)
Onoo was not
(DB at 34) .
WCW's position
factually inaccurate because the Mayhem CD does
include songs
(Onoo at 221-222 ; Onoo Aff . at 1 31, Tab C) .
from the NWO CD .

Moreover,
the very songs that were on the Mayhem CD,
that were attributed to "Sonny Onoo ."
Furthermore,
a party
(Onoo Aff .
were songs
at 1 31) .
Ms Myers is now somehow able to take a
definitive position on Onoo's entitlement to monies from the

Mayhem CD,
testified :
but when asked about the album in her deposition she
"I don't know .
I just heard of this very recently ."
(Myers at 173-174) .
Thus,
Myers inconsistency,
Onoo's averments,
and the
numerous factual issues surrounding the Tommy Boy Contract

demonstrate that Defendant's request for summary judgment on the
Tommy Boy Contract
should be denied . 12
CONCLUSION
For all of the foregoing reasons,
Onoo respectfully submits
that Defendants' Motion For Summary Judgment should be denied .
1' Onoo concedes that WCW and RCA apparently did not consummate its deal to
produce a CD (the "RCA Contract") . Onoo, therefore, withdraws his breach of
contract claim with respect to the RCA Contract .
- 49 -
Respectfully submitted this
v4~
I L-0
day of January,
2003 .
e_a~At2:~_
Cary Ichter
Georgia Bar No . : 382515

Michelle M . Rothenberg-Williams
MEADOWS, ICHTER 6 BOWERS,
Fourteen Piedmont Center,
3535 Piedmont Road
Atlanta, GA
30305
(404) 261-6020
P .C .
Suite 1100
Attorneys
- 50 -
for
Plaintiff
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I have this date served

opposing counsel to this action with the foregoing
PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS'
JUDGMENT by hand delivery,
MOTION FOR SUMMARY
addressed as follows :
Eric Richardson, Esq .

Evan Pont2, Esq .
Troutman Sanders LLP
Suite 5200, Bank of America Plaza
600 Peachtree Street, N .E .
Atlanta, Georgia
30308-22165
This
I(211 day of January,
2003 .
Georgia Bar No . 291703
nc~UEC
ORIGINAL
JAN 1 G 210'?
MAGISTHA'IE JUi)un uiv .
_..- .,.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
N. D. GEORGIA
~5 d.~7~3
KAZUO ONOO,
CIVIL ACTION NO . :
1 :00-CV-0368 (CC)
Plaintiff,
v.
UNIVERSAL WRESTLING,
CORPORATION f/k/a
WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP WRESTLING,
INC ., TURNER SPORTS, INC .,
TURNER ENTERTAINMENT GROUP,
INC . and TURNER BROADCASTING
SYSTEM, INC .,
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Defendants .
PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Comes now Kazuo Onoo and respectfully submits

(pursuant to Rule
56 .1)
his response to Defendants
Universal Wrestling Corporation

Wrestling,
Inc .)
("WCW"),
Turner Sports,
Turner Broadcasting System,

Court the
(f/k/a World Championship
Inc .,
Inc .
("TBS"),
("TSI")
showing
and
the
following :
1 .
Onoo does not dispute SMF No .
2.
Onoo does not dispute SMF No . 2 .
3.
3.
9 .
9 .
1 .
IN
5.
Onoo disputes SMF No .
5 .
Although Defendant WCW
designated wrestlers and other performers to be

contractors,
independent
as a matter of law these workers were
employees of WCW .
Under the terms of the of the standard
Independent Contractor Agreements

with virtually all of its
contract
("ICA")
WCW entered into
talent,
performers were
not allowed to compete with WCW either during or after the

term of their contracts .
Additionally, WCW's standard ICA forbid performers

from doing any kind of work without the express permission
This rule was reinforced by JJ Dillon on April
of WCW .
1999,
when he sent
schedules
Tab
Z;
30,
a memo to "All WCW Talent" regarding
"including personal
Morrison Dep .
at
appearances ."
172-173) .
(P1 .
In his memo,
advised all wrestlers that "all requests for days
Ex .
Mr .
49,
Dillon
'off'
must be requested in advance and approved by JJ Dillon ."

Mr .
Dillon also told the wrestlers
performers
that during time "off,"
could not make personal appearances unless those
appearances were first approved by WCW .

Under the policy announced by Mr .
Dillon,
performer was approached about a personal
if a
appearance,
would be required to refer the request to Mr .
Dillon .
he
Mr .
Dillon would decide whether to approve the appearance .

would then collect
the appearance fee,
- 2
and the performer
WCW
would be required to share the
fee with WCW .
WCW
exercises complete control over performances --- deciding
every detail of every performance --- from the specific

dates and times to the consequences for being late or
scheduled performance .
missing a
Any
failure to comply
with this policy would be considered a breach of contract .

(Id .)
Additionally,
Caucasian manager Jimmy Hart was
characterized by WCW as
an employee and provided all
salary and benefits that

employees,
28-29,
6 .
Onoo .
(Williams Aff 4[9f
9[ 8, Tab C) .
existence,
time .
were afforded to other WCW
which were denied Mr .
Tab D ; Onoo Aff,
the
6.
During its entire
WCW only made money during a brief period of
According to John E .
Kampfe,
the Senior Vice
President and Chief Accounting Officer for TBS,
WCW lost
millions of dollars on an annual basis "from the day Ted

Turner bought
frame ."
it
(Kampfe Dep .
up until roughly
at
19-15) .
1997,
As of June
1998
30,
time
1597,
TBS
funded $76,607,338 of losses and asset acquisitions by WCW .

(Id .
at 113-19) .
WCW was profitable for a very short
period of time sometime between 1997

began to lose money again .
(Id .
- 3 -
at
and 1999 and then

15,
72) .
7 .
Onoo disputes SME No .
its own money because all

parent
WCW never lost
of it losses were
As of June 30,
losses and asset
at
15,
TBS
Inc .
funded $76,607,338
acquisitions by WCW .
WCW was profitable

between 1997
1997,
any of
financed by its
corporation Defendant Turner Broadcasting,
("TBS") .
(Id .
7 .
(Id .
at
of
113-14) .
for a very short period of time sometime
and 1999 and then began to

72-73) .
lose money again .
During that period,
TBS financed WCW's
losses because having access to WCW programming allowed

TBS's subsidiaries to
"boast about its
WCW program "was the highest

television ."
(Id .
at 42) .
access to WCW programming .
ratings" because the
rated cable show on

TBS
financed WCW's losses
(Id .
at
73-79) .
for
WCW did not
have to worry about the cost of talent because TBS covered

that cost,
talent .
and TBS never told WCW to cut its cost of
(Id .
WCW was
On March
31,
Schiller,
the
at
61) .
involved in significant hiring during

1999,
Diana Myers reported to
President of Turner Sports
Dr .
Harvey
that WCW had just
entered into new contracts with two new wrestlers

$895,000)
and had given two wrestlers raises
$115,000),
(P1 .
Ex .
for a net talent cost
75,
Tab U) .
(costing
(costing
increase of $1,010,000 .
Following those increases
- 4
1999 .
in costs,
WCW was "$1,858,000 under budget for 1999 ."

May
1999,
raises,
WCW added 13 new talents,
report,
Myers reported to
for a net increase
(P1 . Ex . 76, Tab V) .
9,
1999,
Agreements)
reported on New ICAs
and Trainees,
currently
(Id .)
A memo from Myers to Bischoff and Bill

June
in
In her May
Schiller that "we are
$100,000 under budget for 1999 ."
During
gave two wrestlers
and terminated two contracts
talent cost of $58,719 .
(Id .)
Busch dated
(Independent Contractor
listing thirty
(30)
new
performers with WCW for the first six months of the year,
representing an increase
$2,709,514 .
8 .
(P1 .
Ex .
64,
in payroll to new personnel of

Tab Y) .
8 .
The
fact that WCW was
losing money never determined the number of performers kept

under contract because WCW knew that
all
of its losses,
and TBS never directed WCW to reduce
size of its talent pool .

9.
talent
TBS would fund any and
(Kampfe Dep . at 61) .
9 .
WCW only added new
that was approved by Vince Russo who did not want
any Asian or Hispanic wrestlers .
Indeed,
WCW acted on
Russo's discriminatory intent by adding only talent who

were not Asian or Hispanic .
A) .
(Hassman Aff .
9[9[
11-12,
WCW continued to have a great need for on screen
talent,
and even hired Eric Bischoff to perform such
- 5 -
Tab
the
services .
WCW also provided a contract to John Riker,
who
acted as an on air talent manager for wrestler Chris

Jericho .
(Defendant WCW's Supp .
Interrogatories,
Tab N ;
given in the Spring,

Pls .'
Lunde at
2000 .
to Pls .'
11) .
Riker's
First
contract was
(Defendant WCW's Supp .
First Interrogatories,
10 .
Resp .
Resp .
to
Tab N) .
Onoo does not dispute that WCW sold certain of
its assets and ceased its operations .

11 .
Onoo does not dispute SME No .
12 .
citizen .
the
1 2,
as he is a
13 .
14 .
14 .
15 .
entire company,
Japanese
Tab C) .
13 .
Bischnff .
Mr .
(Onoo Aff .
12
11 .
15 .
Onoo's work was
for
and not to "specifically" benefit
(Onoo Aff .
9191 6,
11,
17-18,
16 .
17 .
17 .
Tab C) .
16 .
Mr .
Bischoff offered
Onoo the opportunity to become an on air talent to
increase his ability to succeed at WCG7 and to provide

wrestling entertainment for `a7C'dd,
increase popularity .
giving Mr .
thus helping WCW generate
The opportunity was not
limited to
Onoo "international exposure" any more than
other wrestlers or Talent .
(Onoo Aff .
- 6 -
16,
Tab C) .
io .
18 .
Onoo disputes that hip
status was as an "independent contractor"

stated
in Response to SMF No .
5 hereof,
incorporated by reference herein .

his
for the
reasons
which is
Onoo also disputes that
service to WCW was limited to serving as Eric
Bisehoff's consultant,
to SMF No .
herein .
15 hereof,
for the reasons stated in Response

which is
incorporated by reference
With respect to opportunities to perform that WCW
provided to Onoo,
WCW scripted him to manage only Japanese,
Hispanic or African-American wrestlers .
(Onoo Aff .
9f
3,
Tab C) .
19 .
20 .
offered him this contract .
20
15 .
as Lambros,
(Onoo Aff .
91 5,
21 .
Onoo does
not dispute SMF No .
21 .
22 .
22 .
23 .
23 .
Mr .
not Bischoff
Tab C) .
Onoo was
not
scripted to manage "other wrestlers" to the extent
that
Defendants used the term "other" to include non-minority

wrestlers .
Indeed,
Miller because Mr .
throughout his
Japanese,
Mr .
Onoc was scripted to manage Ernest
Miller was African-American .
career Mr .
Onoo was
African-American,
Thus,
scripted only to manage
and/or Hispanic talent .
denied the opportunity to manage Caucasian wrestlers,
- 7
He was
such
as Buddy Lee Parker .

at
(Onoo Aff .
9f$
3-9,
25,
Tab C ;
Bruce
8-10) .
29 .
25 .
to many WCW officials,

J. J.
Dillon .
Also,
Mr .
25 .
29 .
Mr .
Onoo had to report
including Collins,
Myers,
Lambros,
Onoo was provided an office,
credit
card and computer to carry out WCW business affairs .
While
providing consulting services and other labor for WCW,

Onoo often had to answer to persons
Casey Collins,
and others .
Onoo also disputes
such as J . J .
(Onoo Aff .
9[9[
that he was responsible
6,
19,
Mr .
Dillon,
Tab C) .
for the lines he
spoke when he performed for WCW and that he was given

creative freed to decide how the on-air character of "Sonny
Onoo" would be portrayed .
The character of Sonny Onoo was
developed by the booking department .

not
provided,
He was
an outline of the match was provided to him .
told that
the character of Onoo was an
Japanese businessman" and was

those parameters .
26 .
Although a script was
(Onoo Aff .
"evil
instructed to work within

T 7,
Tab C) .
26 .
Onoo did not
independently make decisions about the portrayal of the

character "Sonny Onoo ."
The character of Sonny Onoo was
developed by the booking department .

not provided,
Although a
script was
an outline of the match was provided to him .
- 8 -
He was told that the character of Onoo was an "evil

Japanese businessman" and was
those parameters .
27 .
(Onoo Aff .
9[ 7,
offer this contract .
2'8 .
that
instructed to work within
Onoo does
the terms
Tab C) .
27,
(Onoo Aff .
as Bischoff did not
9f 5,
Tab C) .
not dispute SMF No .
28 to the extent
of the Agreement speak for themselves .
29 .
30 .
Onoo disputes
SMF No .
30 .
29 .
Payment
invoices to
Onoo referenced both Onoo's corporation and Onoo

personally,
at
110) .
for WCW .
with a reference of "a .k .a .
Sonny Onoo ."
Onoo personally provided all services performed

(Onoo at
29-30) .
31 .
32 .
compensation,
a computer,
32,
an office,
31 .
as he received worker's
a credit card and many
other benefits that were given to employees .

8,
(Onoo
(Onoo Aff .
9f
Tab C) .
33 .
33 .
Mr .
Onoo has never
acknowledged that he was an "independent contractor ."
He
has
for
WCW,
always maintained that he was actually an employee
but was denied receiving the benefits and salary that
was provided to Caucasians .

that
the
Although Mr .
legal document purportedly
- 9 -
Onoo admitted
indicates "independent
f
contractor agreement," he never has acknowledged that the
document
is controlling as to his legal rights .
Tab C) .
1 20,
39 .
34 .
35 .
35 .
36 .
36 to the extent that WCW
was put on notice of Vince Russo's

Mr .
a
discriminatory animus,
Onco shows that WCW hired kusso,
in part,
to effectuate
racist policy of excluding Asian and Hispanic
(Hassman Aff .
37 .
the
(Onoo Aff .
IT
11-16,
Onoo disputes
time Mr .
Tab A,
38 .
SMF No .
Russo Interview,
37 .
Mr .
Bischoff was departing WCW,
concrete decisions .
14-15,
Tab A ;
(Onoo Aff .
Bischoff at
218,
4 9,
talent .
Tab B) .
Onoo shows that at

there had been no
Tab v ;
Hassman Aff .
9[9[
221) .
38 .
Mr .
Onoo denies that
WCW was maintaining an effort to "reduce cost
in non-
essential talent," as he established direct evidence thus

WCW was acting on Russo's
as a
Japanese talent .
interview,
39 .
express
intent on eliminating him
(Hassman Aff .
91 11-16,
Tab A ;
Russo
Tab B) .
Onoo disputes
SMF No .
forth in Response to SMF No .
39
for the
:s8 hereof,
- 10
reasons set
which is
90 .
forth in Response to SMF No .
40 for the reasons set
38 hereof,
which is

91 .
forth in Response to SME No .
91
for the reasons set
38 hereof,
which is

92 .
42 .
Mr .
Onoo was only
targeted for termination after Russo expressly stated he

did not want any Hispanic or Asian talent .
9[9f
11-16,
Tab A ;
Russo Interview,
Tab B ;
(Hassman Aff .
Onoo Aff .
9[9f 9-10,
12-15, Tab C) .
43 .
43 .
Busch was not that
familiar with the wrestling performances .

Tab C) .
Also,
successful
rating as WCW's top "heel ."
Interrogatories,
was
22,
Resp .
to
Pls .'
(Onoo at
51-52 ;
First
Tab N) .
Onoo disputes
terminated,
SMF No .
44 .
As Mr .
Onoo's contract
for reasons based on his race,
contends that such unlawful termination is

thus not permitted by the terms of his
under Title VII .
(Hassman Aff .
Interview,
Onoo Aff .
27-29,
91
Busch even congratulated Onoo for his
Defendants WCW's Supp .
99 .
(Onoo Aff .
Tab B ;
Tab D) .
- 11 -
illegal,
Onoo
and
1999 Agreement
1111 11-16,
9f 21,
Mr .
Tab C ;
Tab A ;
or
Russo
Williams Aff .
9[9f
95 .
45 .
Mr .
Onoo was actually
informed orally that he would be terminated on October

1999 .
31,
He did not receive written notice of his termination
until after November
1,
1999 .
(Onco Aff .
Respectfully submitted this
1 10,
Tab C') .
10 day of January,
2003 .
A
Cary Ichter
Michelle M . Rothenberg
MEADOWS, ICHTER 6 BOWERS,

Fourteen Piedmont Center,
3535 Piedmont Road
P .C .
Suite 1100
Atlanta, GA 30305
(904) 261-6020
Attorneys
- 12 -
for
Plaintiff
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is
to certify that
opposing counsel to this
have this date served
action with the
PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS'
foregoing
STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED
FACTS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT by

hand delivering a
copy of the same,
addressed as
follows :
Eric Richardson, Esq .

Evan Pontz, Esq .
Troutman Sanders LLP
Suite 5200, Bank of America Plaza
600 Peachtree Street, N .E .
Atlanta, Georgia
30308-22165
This A6~day of January,
2002 .
~wJ~4 / ~al,~,~
Charles J . Gernazim,

117 Onoo Response To Summary Judgment

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

117 Onoo Response To Summary Judgment

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Case 1:00-cv-00368-CC Document 117 Filed 01/16/03 Page 1 of 65

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

PLAINTIFF ONOO'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS'

Case 1:00-cv-00368-CC Document 117 Filed 01/16/03 Page 2 of 65

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

Defendants are not entitled to summary Judgment because

caused Onoo's termination .

Defendants have tried everything possible to deny Russo's

Russo did not want to use Japanese persons

shows and caused Asian and Hispanic talent,

a senior WCW official testifies that Russo

specifically told WCW officials to "get rid of Asian talent"

Russo even publicly announced his

aversion to Japanese talent

a Japanese guy ."

a Mexican guy ."

never ever, ever, ever,

don't give a shit

he announced "I don't give a shit

And he also declared publicly :

ever see the Japanese wrestler or the

Mexican wrestler over in America ."

even though not required to do so, Onoo can

easily establish discrimination under the McDonnell Douglas

Case 1:00-cv-00368-CC Document 117 Filed 01/16/03 Page 3 of 65

methodology of proving discrimination .

Onoo can establish

"directly" through ample evidence that WCW discriminated

against Onoo and other Asian talent as well as demonstrate that

because Defendants have not even consistently

identified the actual decision-maker as to Onoo .

Defendants have also changed the purported non-discriminatory

for his termination .

Nevertheless, despite their affirmative responses,

despite their failure to seasonably supplement their

Defendants now belatedly contend that

and did not have the potential to be, a major

contributing factor to maintaining or growing ratings

for WCW ."

Although Defendants are entitled to rely upon subjective

Defendants must nevertheless articulate an

objective and reasonable basis for such subjective conclusions

(or fail to rebut)

Defendants have relied on nothing in the

record to support Busch's belated self-serving conclusion that

Case 1:00-cv-00368-CC Document 117 Filed 01/16/03 Page 4 of 65

Thus, because Defendants have not even set forth

the factual predicate for Busch's subjective opinions, Onoo has

fair opportunity to rebut Busch's

required under Supreme Court authority .

even if this Court somehow accepts

Defendants' purported reasons, Onoo has established ample

Onoo can easily establish pretext through

Russo's and other WCW's officials'

regular use of racial slurs

such as "Jap" and "gook ."

racial insensitivity was so

entrenched at WCW that WCW's legal counsel

"the gook ."

is "unworthy of belief ."

WCW's own marketing research

identified Onoo with the highest