"The rebuilt Pac-12 secured a significant victory in its legal fight with the Mountain West on Tuesday when a federal judge denied the Mountain West's motion to dismiss the so-called poaching penalty lawsuit. Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen of the Northern District of California denied all four causes of action in the motion and set a case management conference for Nov. 18."
"The MWC's arguments do not provide a basis for the Court to disregard the Complaint's allegations of antitrust injury. Although the Pac-12 agreed to the terms of the Scheduling Agreement, it has alleged that it was desperate and had little leverage at the time it entered into the agreement. To hold that a contract is exempt from antitrust scrutiny simply because one party reluctant[ly]' accepted its terms would be to misread section 1 of the Sherman Act, which reaches every contract that unreasonably restrains trade."
A federal magistrate judge denied the Mountain West's motion to dismiss all four causes of action in the Pac-12's poaching penalty lawsuit and scheduled a case management conference for Nov. 18. The ruling validated the Pac-12's allegations and raised questions about the Mountain West's ability to collect $55 million in fees. The judge found that the Pac-12 alleged antitrust injury, noting the conference entered the scheduling agreement while desperate and with little leverage. The agreement included a poaching penalty clause signed in 2023; after multiple schools announced moves in 2024, the Mountain West demanded the fees. Mediation efforts failed.
Read at www.mercurynews.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]