CHARLOTTE, N.C. — The courts dealt 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports a setback in the antitrust lawsuit the two teams filed against NASCAR.
On Thursday, a three-judge federal appellate panel vacated an injunction that required the two teams to be recognized as chartered teams while their court case makes its way through the legal system.
The teams sued NASCAR after refusing to sign the charter agreement renewal last fall.
Attorney for the two teams, Jeffrey Kessler, said the teams remain committed to the case.
“We are disappointed by today’s ruling by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and are reviewing the decision to determine our next steps,” said Kessler. “This ruling is based on a very narrow consideration of whether a release of claims in the charter agreements is anti-competitive and does not impact our chances of winning at trial scheduled for Dec. 1.
“We remain confident in our case and committed to racing for the entirety of this season as we continue our fight to create a fair and just economic system for stock car racing that is free of anticompetitive, monopolistic conduct.”
While the antitrust case isn’t scheduled for court until December, the two teams have 14 days to appeal Thursday’s ruling to the full Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Should no appeal be filed, NASCAR cannot enforce the ruling until seven days after that deadline passes — June 26.
The panel wrote in its decision that it saw no cases, which support the argument of the teams:
“In entering a preliminary injunction in this case, the district court held that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their antitrust action against the National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing, LLC (NASCAR), and its CEO, James France, because NASCAR, as an alleged monopolist, required the plaintiffs, as a condition of doing business with them, to enter into a release for past conduct.
“Because that theory of antitrust law is not supported by any case of which we are aware, we conclude that it was not a likely basis for success on the merits and vacate the injunction.”
