Tag: 23XI Racing

23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports have had their preliminary injunction request denied.

In his ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Frank Whitney said the teams “have not met their burden as required.” However, the teams can file a renewed motion for a preliminary injunction if circumstances change.

The current charter agreement expires on Dec. 31. The lawsuit will be assigned to the fast track to be settled as quickly as possible.

The request was heard earlier this week. 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports argued to race as charter teams in 2025, or their operations would suffer. Additionally, they asked for the release clause in the charter agreement to be waived, which gives teams no right to sue NASCAR.

However, Whitney cited case law that states “a plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must ‘demonstrate that irreparable injury is likely in the absence of an injunction.’ A showing of the ‘possibility of irreparable harm’ is not sufficient.” He went on to additionally cite that “the required irreparable harm must be neither remote or speculative, but actual and imminent.”

[lawrence-auto-related count=3 category=1428]

23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, through their lead lawyer, Jeffrey Kessler, argued that without a charter agreement, the teams could lose their sponsor partners, and the drivers could leave for another team. Whitney viewed both of those prospects as too speculative.

Whitney addressed that the teams did not allege that their business would not survive without a preliminary injunction. “Instead, they allege that their businesses may not survive without a preliminary injunction. This allegation does not indicate an ‘impending threat of [Plaintiffs’] operations not surviving the pendency of this matter.’”

“Fourth, although loss of goodwill may justify injunctive relief … at this stage, Plaintiffs have alleged only a potential loss of goodwill, contingent on a host of events occurring, including speculation about how third parties may or may not act. Finally, the possibility that NASCAR may exclude open teams … is merely speculative. Based on the parties’ representations at the hearing, the Court understands Plaintiffs could sign open contracts today and continue racing in 2025.

“Instead, they have chosen not because they have been unable to negotiate a contract without the provision of which they complain. As such, this speculative harm does not warrant the extraordinary relief of a preliminary injunction.”

23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports announced they intend to appeal the decision:

Statement from 23XI and Front Row Motorsports ownership. pic.twitter.com/1sIr931P4V

— 23XI Racing (@23XIRacing) November 8, 2024

23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports have had their motion for expedited discovery denied by the court.

The request was filed earlier this month on the heels of the motion for preliminary injunction that was filed. The teams were seeking immediate access to documents and files from NASCAR CEO Jim France, Lesa France Kennedy, Ben Kennedy, Steve O’Donnell, Steve Phelps and Scott Prime. The requests concerned the 2025 charter agreement, the negotiation process, the take-it-or-leave-it final offer made to teams in September, exclusivity NASCAR has with racetracks, acquisition of the ARCA Menards Series, and specific provisions in the charter agreement.

In his ruling, United States District Judge Frank D. Whitney laid out multiple factors for the decision. First, the court determined the request would not be as the team’s proposed of “narrowly tailored” and a “minimal burden to Defendants.” The requests for production were also seen as overly broad as it spanned eight years.

As written in the ruling, “More critically, though, Plaintiffs seek all of this information within five days of a Court order granting their motion for expedited discovery … a timeframe that would put a significant burden on Defendants. Accordingly, this factor weighs heavily against granting the motion.”

Secondly was the issue of irreparable harm, which the teams had to show existed if the expedited discovery was not granted. The teams, however, had acknowledged they could show a likelihood of harm done. It was seen by the court that the Plaintiffs conceded that they didn’t need the expedited discovery as it pertains to the preliminary injunction.

“Plaintiffs do not address the potential irreparable harm caused by the risk of loss of evidence if this Court does not permit expedited discovery,” the ruling states. “Defendants state in their response that they ‘have implemented a litigation hold that preserves relevant materials, including those requested by Plaintiffs.’ Accordingly. This consideration also weighs against granting Plaintiffs’ motion.”

Thursday, the motion was denied. The preliminary injunction hearing is scheduled for Monday, Nov. 4.

23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports filed the preliminary injunction to race as chartered teams in 2025 while the antitrust case goes through the legal system.