Teams Score Major Market Definition Win in NASCAR Lawsuit

Let us know what you think

Join the conversation on socials

Picture of Kauy Ostlien

Kauy Ostlien

All Posts

What’s Happening?

Judge Kenneth D. Bell has granted summary judgment, defining the relevant market as “Premier Stock-Car Racing,” while also denying a motion for summary judgment from NASCAR, which would have dismissed the antitrust lawsuit altogether.

This issue was part of the October 23 summary judgment hearing, with the teams requesting that the market in which NASCAR operates be considered “Premier Stock-Car Racing.” NASCAR has pushback on this definition, calling it narrow and suggesting it should be expanded to include other professionally recognized racing series.

This ruling not only means that the market definition’s range is much more precise, centering simply on Premier Stock-Car Racing, but also that NASCAR cannot assert during the December trial that the teams had alternatives to competing in NASCAR.

In his ruling, Judge Bell even pointed to NASCAR’s now-defunct counterclaim, saying that NASCAR claimed the teams had market power in the Cup Series because they “could not reasonably substitute Indy Car or Formula 1 racing teams or even the racing teams participating in its two lower-level series.”

Judge Bell then said:

“However, in opposing Plaintiffs’ relevant market, NASCAR now contends that the same motorsports that could not supply racing teams to the Cup Series are suddenly readily available substitutes for the Cup Series teams like Plaintiffs, to sell their services. Not only is it illogical, but there is no record evidence that racing teams in the various motorsports can only move from NASCAR to another motorsport but not vice-versa.” — Judge Kenneth D. Bell

The Court also denied NASCAR’s motion for summary judgment, which would have dismissed this case, bringing an end to the three motions for summary judgment discussed on October 23.

In response to the judges’ ruling, NASCAR stated that it respects the Court’s decision but will address it with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals “if necessary”, as “we believe it is legally flawed.”

We have extensively covered all aspects of this lawsuit via the timeline linked below.

What do you think about this? Let us know your opinion on Discord or X. Don’t forget that you can also follow us on InstagramFacebook, and YouTube.

Share this:

Picture of Kauy Ostlien

Kauy Ostlien

All Posts