It was a fantastic time for lawyers who practice in the gymnastics business. Between deal-making, discussions and prosecution, there was no lack of billable hours for customers who often have the money to pay hefty expenses. Sportico began its analysis of the main debates in school sports on Monday, and it now turns to the main ones in professional sports:
NFL defeats Jon Gruden in jury and wins Sunday Ticket Antitrust Class Action.
For about a month, the NFL had lost the Sunday Ticket antitrust class action litigation and faced the prospect of being ordered to pay as much as$ 14.1 billion to classes of more than 2.4 million residential subscribers and more than 48, 000 restaurants, bars and other commercial establishments that purchased Sunday Ticket anytime between 2011 to 2023.

The NFL then immediately won the case, no longer owing even a dime.
Over the summer, that amazing growth occurred.
In June, a judge in Los Angeles found the NFL violated antitrust laws through its 32 clubs pooling television privileges for out-of-town viewers and, jurors believed, exploiting that sharing to charge higher prices. The NFL used the Sunday Ticket to give sports to fans from other cities, according to the ruling. NFL teams could individually bargain to broadcast their activities to supporters living outside of the team ‘ house countries in an alternative arrangement in which NFL team competed in radio.
But a fortnight after, the trial judge, Philip S. Gutierrez, granted the NFL a view as a matter of rules. No fair jury could have determined class-wide harm or damages, according to Gutierrez, which is unusual. Gutierrez declared that the jury, who had access to 27 testimony and saw 82 admitted expresses during a three-week test, was utterly perplexed by the circumstances. They mistakenly interpreted a refund on costs as an excess and, Gutierrez concluded, didn’t reasonably following expert testimony about hypotheticals involving NFL activity broadcasts distributed like university games.
The defendants have filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit’s U.S. Court of Appeals. The NFL claims that the arrangement improves opportunities for fans to see games because some fans who live outside of their city might gain access to games or have to spend more to enjoy them. For the 2024 season, the Sunday Passport costs$ 479 via YouTube Television, though the cost is significantly lower for university students —$ 199—and may be lower through several different discounts/packages. In order to serve consumers with more entertainment, bars and restaurants also have to pay more for the tickets.

In May, a section of three Supreme Court of Nevada judges ruled 2-1 against former Las Vegas Raiders head coach Jon Gruden, who alleges that NFL commissioner Roger Goodell or someone else on the chairman’s representative had violated his Raiders ‘ deal. The NFL’s legal achievement outside the West was also evident. The case centers on Gruden resigning in disgrace from his job in 2021—and walking away from about$ 60 million remaining on his contract—after The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times published Gruden-authored emails containing racist, misogynistic and homophobic remarks. Gruden’s case has an issue because he must comply with a clause in his Raiders contract that prohibits him from suing until that clause is exhausted. Goodell, the same person he accuses of misconduct, would oversee the arbitration.
But Gruden still has a chance. Other justices voted to reexamine the case in October. The 61-year-old coach who helped the Tampa Bay Buccaneers win the Super Bowl in 2003 may find 2025 to be a better year in the court.
· Michael Jordan Scores Injunction Against NASCAR
In an antitrust lawsuit filed this fall, Front Row Motorsports and Michael Jordan, who are both owned by Michael Jordan and Denny Hamlin, allege that NASCAR is using its monopoly power to impede the growth of premier stock car racing. NASCAR refutes the allegations and asserts that 23XI Racing and Front Row are upset that they were unable to reach a compromise during the negotiation of a charter. The teams declined to sign a charter, which guarantees a starting position in NASCAR-sanctioned races while restricting a team’s capacity to compete in other circuits and requires them to waive potential legal claims.
The first attempt by the Jordan-led group to obtain a preliminary injunction that would allow the two teams to compete as charter teams and not to file legal claims was rejected in November. A federal district judge argued that an injunction wasn’t necessary because the alleged harm appeared to be hypothetical. U. S. District Judge Frank D. Whitney noted there was no ( apparent ) forthcoming loss of drivers, sponsorships or fans.

The second preliminary injunction attempt was successful. Kenneth D. Bell, a different judge, decided that 23XI Racing and Front Row could now report specific harms. Bell noted that 23XI drivers Tyler Reddick and Bubba Wallace sent emails expressing worry and hinting at potential legal action if their team didn’t land a charter. Additionally, the lack of a charter raised important questions for 23XI Racing sponsors Monster Energy and Love’s Travel Stops. NASCAR is prohibited from preventing Front Row from purchasing a Stewart-Haas Racing charter by the injunction. On Monday Bell denied NASCAR’s motion to stay the injunction as it appeals to the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
NASCAR is armed with persuasive defenses against claims it is violating antitrust law, and the litigation has a long way to go. Additionally, it’s possible that the parties will reach agreement. But at least in the near term, the GOAT of basketball is showing he’s also pretty skilled as a team owner who’s willing to challenge the system.
Le Antitrust Class Action Lawsuit is thrown out by UFC.
UFC and UFC fighters successfully resolved Cung Le et al. Despite a decade and a skeptical judge, it was possible. v. Zuffa, a class action antitrust litigation involving fighters who were in one or more UFC bouts that took place, or were broadcast, in the U. S. from Dec. 16, 2010, to June 30, 2017. A revised version of an earlier settlement that a judge rejected was reached by the two parties, which was worth$ 375 million.
The fighters demanded billions of dollars in damages and claimed that UFC had stifled economic competition for their services. UFC denied the allegation and argued the antitrust arguments were nonsensical, saying that while fighters argued they deserve a greater share of UFC revenues, there is no precedent in the U. S. legal system for a non-unionized workforce to be owed a certain minimum percentage of an employer’s revenue. Kajan Johnson et al., UFC, still faces a very similar case. v. Zuffa, which concerns fighters who participated in UFC fights from July 1, 2017, to the present. Johnson is early in the litigation and could eventually settle as well.

Venu Sports is blocked as Fox Appeal, ESPN, and
The anticipated release of Venu Sports, a live sports-focused streaming service with a monthly price of$ 42.99, was delayed until August when U.S. District Judge Margaret M. Garnett granted FuboTV’s request for a preliminary injunction barring Walt Disney, ESPN, Fox, Warner Brothers Discovery, and Hulu from proceeding. The U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is now reviewing Garnett’s ruling.
Garnett found it problematic that rival businesses would combine their content on one platform and exclude other options, as it might cause consumers to pay more. The defendants, including ESPN, object to Venu Sports ‘ non-exclusive content, arguing that it would give sports fans access to an affordable live sports streaming service. The outcome of the case will have major ramifications for sports fans as well as in shaping the relationship between antitrust law and sports broadcasting.
NBA and Warner Bros. Dispute: Discoveries and Savings Inside the NBA
Sometimes it’s hard to hear “no” for an answer. That rule appeared crucial to the brief but contentious contract dispute involving TBS and Warner Bros., the NBA on the other hand. On the one hand, discovery. The two sides were at odds over whether TBS and Warner Bros. The conditions of Amazon’s offer to broadcast games from 2025 to 2035 could and did be met by Discovery.
The NBA argued that TBS and WBD couldn’t compete because Amazon’s streaming service is available, and even if they could, they couldn’t because of the numerous terms changed. WBD, in contrast, reasoned that Amazon’s offer provided for cable TV rights since the offer contemplates games that TBS distributes on TNT via non-broadcast TV, a term that includes both cable and internet distribution. A match or a counteroffer was there? Because they settled in November, keeping WBD’s 35-year partnership with the NBA, we’ll never know. The settlement calls for Inside the NBA to continue as a TNT Sports production but aired on ESPN/ABC.

Scandals Bring Harsher Light to Sports Betting
Since 2018, the legalization of sports betting and the support of leagues of the sport have been on a high since the U.S. Supreme Court in Murphy v. NCAA ruled that it was unlawful for Congress to compel states to deny sports betting without the existence of a related federal standard.
Thirty-eight states have legalized sports betting, advertisements for which flood broadcasts of games. However, 2024 featured developments that have sparked more investigation into the practice. In addition to these, Ippei Mizuhara, Shohei Ohtani’s interpreter, pleaded guilty to bank fraud and tax fraud charges over his scheme to steal nearly$ 17 million from Ohtani to pay off his sports betting debts, the NBA has banned Jontay Porter, who has admitted to conspiracy to commit wire fraud.
Members of Congress are now weighing the SAFE Bet Act, which would require states to gain approval from the Justice Department to offer legalized sports gambling and limit sports betting advertising. On behalf of his organization and its affiliated institutions, NCAA President Charlie Baker has aggressively pressed states to outlaw or restrict prop bets, which are wagers on particular events or outcomes in a game.
Diamond Sports ( Bally Sports ) Survives Bankruptcy to Live On
Bankruptcy proceedings often resemble negotiations, with the judge attempting to serve as a facilitator of a deal between creditors and a debtor. For Diamond Sports Group ( Bally Sports ) and its petition for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, this dynamic has proven to be accurate. A plan that will allow Diamond to remain in the TV and streaming industry for the foreseeable future was approved by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez in November. The reorganization involves Diamond distributing in-market games for its 13 NBA, eight NHL and six MLB team partners in 2025 and beyond.

In a world where more and more fans are watching sports through streaming apps in place of cable or satellite, the subtext of Diamond’s proceeding is how regional sports networks will operate. This will have profound effects on both the teams and leagues that rely on that revenue as well.
Dearica Hamby Sues WNBA and Aces, Alleging Pregnancy Discrimination
Los Angeles Sparks forward Dearica Hamby sued the WNBA and her former team, the Las Vegas Aces, for employment retaliation in August. She claims that the team traded her for the reason that the league and the Aces discriminated against her because she is pregnant. The Aces and the WNBA disagree with the claim, which also emphasizes that Hamby was a member of the Aces and not the league, which has sparked a legal debate about whether a league is a joint employer of a player.
· Fate of an NBA Franchise and WNBA Franchise Rests in Hands of Arbitrators
The ownership of the franchise of one of the major sports leagues is not often decided by a court case, but that is the case with the Minnesota Timberwolves and Minnesota Lynx. If the team is currently under the control of current owner Glen Taylor or rumored to become a team owner Alex Rodriguez and Marc Lore, three arbitrators will decide that Alex Rodriguez and Marc Lore are the winners. Taylor contends he nixed the deal, but Rodriguez and Lore argue otherwise. In 2025, a decision from arbitration is anticipated, and federal court could then rule against it.
Shannon Sharpe defeats Brett Favre in a defamation lawsuit.
In September, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a trial judge’s ruling to dismiss Brett Favre’s defamation lawsuit against Shannon Sharpe. In 2022, Sharpe and Skip Bayless co-hosted FS1’s Skip and Shannon: Undisputed. They both claimed that” Brett Favre is taking from the underserved” and that” Favre stole money from people who really needed it.” The main issue with Favre’s case was that statements of opinion are not defamatory, as opposed to statements that are objectively false. Sharpe, the court reasoned, merely offered a hot take based on publicly disclosed materials.

Jim Trotter and the NFL settle a discrimination claim in the workplace
Former NFL Media reporter Jim Trotter reached a settlement with the NFL in October after arguing that the NFL violated Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 by declining to extend his employment contract in alleged retaliation for him publicly challenging the league and NFL commissioner Roger Goodell about race discrimination and lack of diversity. The settlement included the creation and NFL funding of Work, Plan, Pray Foundation, a scholarship foundation for journalism students at historically black colleges and universities.
Cleveland Browns Files a lawsuit over” Art Modell Law” in a City Stadium dispute
The Cleveland Browns are considering moving to Brook Park, a city close to the team, but the city of Cleveland claims that Ohio Revised Code 9. 67, the so-called” Art Modell law,” prevents the team from moving there. The law bars Ohio-based pro teams that use a “tax-supported facility for most of its home games” and that “receive financial assistance” from playing home games “elsewhere” unless several benchmarks are met. The Browns sued Cleveland in October, claiming that the law, which was passed in Ohio in the middle of the 1990s after Browns owner Art Modell changed its name to the Baltimore Ravens, is unconstitutional because it allegedly interferes with interstate commerce and private contracts. In 2025, the case will spark an interesting debate.
· Zion Williamson Wins Agency Lawsuit at Federal Appeals Court
Zion Williamson, the forward of the New Orleans Pelicans, won a lawsuit brought by his former marketing firm, Prime Sports Marketing, which sought damages totaling more than$ 100 million. Prior claimed Williamson broke his commitment to the NBA Draft while he was a freshman at Duke in April 2019. In May, the Fourth Circuit upheld a judgment for Williamson, who successfully argued he could lawfully void the contract. By failing to warn Williamson that he would lose NCAA eligibility to compete as a student-athlete in the contract, the court determined thatPrime had broken North Carolina law. Since Williamson, who was expected to take the first overall pick in the 2019 NBA Draft, was obviously not returning to Duke, it may have been a case of “form over substance” since “form compliance with form matters.”