A federal judge recently overturned a jury’s $4.7 billion verdict in a class-action lawsuit filed by “Sunday Ticket” subscribers against the NFL. U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez ruled that the testimony of two witnesses for the subscribers had flawed methodologies and should have been excluded, leading to the judgment being granted to the NFL.
The lawsuit, which covered 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses in the United States, claimed that the NFL violated antitrust laws in distributing out-of-market Sunday afternoon games on a premium subscription service. The jury had initially awarded $4.7 billion in damages to the subscribers, but Judge Gutierrez found issues with the methodology used to calculate these damages.
The NFL expressed gratitude for the ruling and emphasized that their media distribution model provides fans with various options to follow the game, including local broadcasts on free over-the-air television. The judge’s decision highlighted the flaws in the economic models presented by the witnesses for the subscribers and emphasized the lack of sound economic methodology in their testimonies.
The jury’s damages verdict did not align with the models presented by the experts, leading to a discrepancy in the calculation of damages. Judge Gutierrez pointed out that the jury did not follow his instructions and relied on inputs not tied to the record to determine the damages amount, which ultimately led to the verdict being overturned.
This case has been ongoing since 2015, with previous rulings both in favor of and against the NFL. In 2017, the lawsuit was dismissed, but later reinstated by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. It is likely that the plaintiffs will appeal the recent decision to the 9th Circuit once again.
Overall, the recent ruling in the “Sunday Ticket” lawsuit highlights the complexities of antitrust laws and the importance of sound economic methodology in presenting testimonies in court cases. The impact of this decision extends beyond the immediate parties involved and serves as a reminder of the intricate legal processes involved in such class-action lawsuits.
