NASCAR vs. 23XI, FRM lawsuit: Both sides double down ahead of summary judgment hearing

New filings in the 23XI Racing, Front Row Motorsports lawsuit against NASCAR. Both sides are doubling down on previous arguments. There is a settlement conference scheduled for Tuesday this week, but all eyes on are on the summary judgment hearing on Thursday.

The teams want the court to rule on the market definition that the two sides will be arguing over should this go to trial. It is very common for two sides in a lawsuit to come to an agreed set of facts ahead of the case. Defining what the market is, in regard to an antitrust lawsuit, is likely necessary. That is for the court to decide, though.

NASCAR has argued in favor of a broader definition for the market, one that includes other forms of motorsport such as IndyCar. However, 23XI and Front Row have argued for a narrower definition of “premier stock car racing” in regard to the market definition in this case.

In the latest filing, 23XI Racing and Front Row made similar arguments to in the past. They argue that NASCAR actually admits to the same market definition in the counterclaim.

“Because NASCAR has adopted the same relevant market as Plaintiffs to support NASCAR’s counterclaim, NASCAR cannot reverse course and claim that Plaintiffs’ market definition is incorrect,” the teams argue in the new filing. “The Court should grant Plaintiffs affirmative summary judgment on market definition and monopoly power in light of NASCAR’s binding judicial admissions that such a relevant market exists.”

The teams need the market definition to be narrower to suppor their argument. While the court could side with NASCAR, it would be a major decision. It could change the definition of motorsports, as a business, in America. So, this is a fairly big deal. Potentially precedent setting.

NASCAR goes for statute of limitations in 23XI, Front Row lawsuit

The sanctioning body is seeking a summary judgment on the antitrust claims made by 23XI Racing and Front Row. In NASCAR’s filing, the initial focus was put on actions prior to October 2, 2020. There were several arguments made throughout the filing.

NASCAR argues that Plaintiffs cannot seek any damages at trial. They claim that the plaintiffs “admit they cannot recover damages for pre-October 2020 conduct.” Attorneys for NASCAR laos argue that the “Plaintiffs’ damages model fails because there were no overt acts in 2021,” and “The law bars plaintiffs’ damages theory for 2022-2024.”

Also in the filing, NASCAR states that “Plaintiffs identify no disputes of material fact hat preclude smmary judgment for NASCAR on other issues.” They also say “Plaintiffs’ opposition confirms they are not entitled to a jury trial on their section 1 claim.”

Clearly, both sides are still at odds and at this point, are doubling down. A settlement this week would be shocking, to say the least. The NASCAR lawsuit is still likely headed for trial on December 1.

23XI and Front Row are still seeking to get facts set ahead of trial. There has been a bit of a dispute on the mediator recently. Judge Bell is now going to be sitting in on these mediations. These filings today are setting the stage for Thursday’s hearing. After that, the material facts of the case could change. Perhaps it would be enough to convince the two sides to actually settle.

The NASCAR Cup Series has two races left in the season. Martinsville and Phoenix remain.