Top Price Market
  • Business
  • Politics
  • Investing
  • World
  • Business
  • Politics
  • Investing
  • World

Top Price Market

Business

Federal judge overturns $4.7 billion jury verdict in ‘Sunday Ticket’ lawsuit, ruling for NFL

by August 2, 2024
August 2, 2024
Federal judge overturns $4.7 billion jury verdict in ‘Sunday Ticket’ lawsuit, ruling for NFL

LOS ANGELES — A federal judge has overturned a jury’s $4.7 billion verdict in the class-action lawsuit filed by “Sunday Ticket” subscribers against the NFL and has granted judgment to the NFL.

U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez ruled Thursday that the testimony of two witnesses for the subscribers had flawed methodologies and should have been excluded.

“Without the testimonies of Dr. [Daniel] Rascher and Dr. [John] Zona, no reasonable jury could have found class-wide injury or damages,” Gutierrez wrote at the end of his 16-page ruling.

The jury on June 27 awarded $4.7 billion in damages to residential and commercial subscribers after it ruled the NFL violated antitrust laws in distributing out-of-market Sunday afternoon games on a premium subscription service.

The lawsuit covered 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses in the United States who paid for the package on DirecTV of out-of-market games from the 2011 through 2022 seasons.

The jury of five men and three women found the NFL liable for $4,610,331,671.74 in damages to the residential class (home subscribers) and $96,928,272.90 in damages to the commercial class (business subscribers).

Since damages can be tripled under federal antitrust laws, the NFL could have been liable for $14,121,779,833.92.

It is not the first time the NFL has won a judgment as matter of law in this case, which has been going on since 2015.

In 2017, U.S. District Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell dismissed the lawsuit and ruled for the NFL because she said “Sunday Ticket” did not reduce output of NFL games and that even though DirecTV might have charged inflated prices, that did not “on its own, constitute harm to competition” because it had to negotiate with the NFL to carry the package.

Two years later, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the case.

It is likely the plaintiffs will again appeal to the 9th Circuit.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS
0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
Children of undercover Russian spy couple only learned their nationality on flight to Moscow
next post
It’s official: Vice President Kamala Harris goes over the top and clinches Democratic presidential nomination

You may also like

Airbus could prioritize deliveries to non-U.S. customers if...

Recalled products linked to more than 100 infant...

Payrolls soared by 336,000 in September, defying expectations...

Nvidia loses nearly $600 billion in market value...

Babies R Us is back: Here’s why Kohl’s...

Apple boosts U.S. investment plans with $500 billion...

OpenAI closes funding at $157 billion valuation as...

Super Bowl ads beckon up to $8 million...

As home sellers and buyers wait on a...

You have a month left to get your...

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free


    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Latest

    • 4th round of US-Iran talks ends as Trump set to embark on...

    • Missiles, drones and airstrikes, until a sudden ceasefire. How India and Pakistan agreed to an uneasy truce

    • In China, some see the ghost of Mao as Trump upends America and the world

    • Pope! Amigo! Peruvians remember the young American priest who became pope

    • Dozens of boxes of Nazi materials found in basement at top Argentinian court

    Categories

    • Business (1,634)
    • Investing (4,793)
    • Politics (7,566)
    • Uncategorized (2)
    • World (6,164)
    • About us
    • Contacts
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions
    • Email Whitelisting

    Disclaimer: toppricemarket.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 toppricemarket.com | All Rights Reserved


    Back To Top