NFL Sacks Antitrust Class Action Over 'Sunday Ticket' TV Package
A class action suit claiming that the NFL's exclusive DirecTV package violated antitrust law was sacked by a federal court judge Friday, who saw no evidence of conspiracy, collusion or significant harm to football fans or bars showing the games.
June 30, 2017 at 05:03 PM
4 minute read
A class action suit claiming that the NFL's exclusive DirecTV package violated antitrust law was sacked by a federal court judge Friday, who saw no evidence of conspiracy, collusion or significant harm to football fans or bars showing the games.
In a 38-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell of the Central District of California upheld with prejudice the National Football League's motion to dismiss the case filed in Los Angeles federal court by a legal team led by Beth A. Wilkinson and Jonathan D. Kelley of Wilkinson Walsh + Eskovitz and Gregg H. Levy and Derek Ludwin of Covington & Burling. Levy argued the case for the league.
The plaintiffs in the consolidated multidistrict litigation were the bars and restaurants that ponied up thousands of dollars each year for DirecTV's “Sunday Ticket” package, which allows their customers to see not only the games airing on local broadcast television, but also the out-of-market ones. In this era of increased employment mobility and the rise of fantasy football, that become crucial for NFL fans who have interest beyond their local teams.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
'Erroneous Assumption'?: Apple Challenges DOJ Antitrust Remedy in Google Search Monopoly Case
3 minute read
'Appropriate Relief'?: Google Offers Remedy Concessions in DOJ Antitrust Fight
4 minute read
Pre-Internet High Court Ruling Hobbling Efforts to Keep Tech Giants from Using Below-Cost Pricing to Bury Rivals
6 minute read
O'Melveny Secures Global Clearances for Korean Air-Asiana Merger
Trending Stories
- 1The Fearless Forecaster’s Employment Law Predictions for 2025
- 2Judicial Conference Declines Democratic Request to Refer Justice Thomas to DOJ
- 3People in the News—Jan. 2, 2025—Eastburn and Gray, Klehr Harrison
- 4Deal Watch: Latham, Paul Weiss, Debevoise Land on Year-End Big Deals. Plus, Mixed Messages for 2025 M&A
- 5Bathroom Recording Leads to Lawyer's Disbarment: Disciplinary Roundup
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
