Breaking News
Investing Pro 0
Cyber Monday Extended SALE: Up to 60% OFF InvestingPro+ CLAIM OFFER

U.S. Supreme Court punts Oakland appeal over Las Vegas move by NFL's Raiders

Stock Markets Oct 03, 2022 12:12PM ET
Saved. See Saved Items.
This article has already been saved in your Saved Items
 
2/2 © Reuters. FILE PHOTO: Sep 18, 2022; Paradise, Nevada, USA; A general overall view of Allegiant Stadium during the game between the Las Vegas Raiders and the Arizona Cardinals. Mandatory Credit: Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports/File Photo 2/2

By Mike Scarcella

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear Oakland's bid to collect more than $240 million in damages from the National Football League and its 32 teams for allowing the Raiders franchise to relocate to Las Vegas in violation, according to the jilted California city, of federal antitrust law.

The justices turned away Oakland's appeal of a lower court ruling in favor of the NFL and the Raiders, which moved to Las Vegas for the 2020 season. Oakland, which the Raiders previously left in order to play in Los Angeles only to return 13 years later in 1995, had sought monetary damages but was not demanding that the Raiders be forced to return to the city.

The court declined review without comment.

Oakland in 2018 sued the NFL and its teams, including the Raiders, accusing them of violating U.S. law on anti-competitive practices. The city's complaint demanded $240 million in damages for lost tax revenue and funds invested in the team's stadium, the Oakland Coliseum. The city accused the NFL of restricting the ability of Oakland "and other host cities to maintain and sponsor an NFL club at competitive prices."

All but one of the NFL's teams, the Miami Dolphins, approved the Raiders' relocation from Oakland to Las Vegas, where they opened the 2020 season at $1.9 billion Allegiant Stadium.

Lawyers for Oakland and the Raiders on Monday did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.

Attorneys for the league and its teams successfully won dismissal of Oakland's lawsuit in a U.S. district court. The league's attorneys said the city's lawsuit "turns antitrust on its head."

A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously in favor of the NFL and the Raiders in December 2021.

The 9th Circuit found that Oakland lacked the proper legal standing to bring antitrust claims in U.S. district court. The "city's damages are highly speculative and would be exceedingly difficult to calculate," the 9th Circuit added.

Oakland's attorneys appealed to the Supreme Court in March and told the justices that "losing any chance at an NFL team caused the city clear and direct economic harm, and that harm is not at all speculative given that Oakland already had a team."

Attorneys for the league and Raiders said in their Supreme Court filing that the 9th Circuit "correctly concluded that alleged injury" to Oakland was "both indirect and too speculative."

U.S. Supreme Court punts Oakland appeal over Las Vegas move by NFL's Raiders
 

Related Articles

XPeng sees strength despite EPS miss
XPeng sees strength despite EPS miss By Investing.com - Nov 30, 2022

By Michael Elkins Shares of XPeng Inc. (NYSE:XPEV) are up 10.35% in pre-market trading on Wednesday following the release of the company's 3Q earnings report. The company reported...

Add a Comment

Comment Guidelines

We encourage you to use comments to engage with other users, share your perspective and ask questions of authors and each other. However, in order to maintain the high level of discourse we’ve all come to value and expect, please keep the following criteria in mind:  

  •            Enrich the conversation, don’t trash it.

  •           Stay focused and on track. Only post material that’s relevant to the topic being discussed. 

  •           Be respectful. Even negative opinions can be framed positively and diplomatically. Avoid profanity, slander or personal attacks directed at an author or another user. Racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination will not be tolerated.

  • Use standard writing style. Include punctuation and upper and lower cases. Comments that are written in all caps and contain excessive use of symbols will be removed.
  • NOTE: Spam and/or promotional messages and comments containing links will be removed. Phone numbers, email addresses, links to personal or business websites, Skype/Telegram/WhatsApp etc. addresses (including links to groups) will also be removed; self-promotional material or business-related solicitations or PR (ie, contact me for signals/advice etc.), and/or any other comment that contains personal contact specifcs or advertising will be removed as well. In addition, any of the above-mentioned violations may result in suspension of your account.
  • Doxxing. We do not allow any sharing of private or personal contact or other information about any individual or organization. This will result in immediate suspension of the commentor and his or her account.
  • Don’t monopolize the conversation. We appreciate passion and conviction, but we also strongly believe in giving everyone a chance to air their point of view. Therefore, in addition to civil interaction, we expect commenters to offer their opinions succinctly and thoughtfully, but not so repeatedly that others are annoyed or offended. If we receive complaints about individuals who take over a thread or forum, we reserve the right to ban them from the site, without recourse.
  • Only English comments will be allowed.

Perpetrators of spam or abuse will be deleted from the site and prohibited from future registration at Investing.com’s discretion.

Write your thoughts here
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
Post also to:
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Thanks for your comment. Please note that all comments are pending until approved by our moderators. It may therefore take some time before it appears on our website.
 
Are you sure you want to delete this chart?
 
Post
 
Replace the attached chart with a new chart ?
1000
Your ability to comment is currently suspended due to negative user reports. Your status will be reviewed by our moderators.
Please wait a minute before you try to comment again.
Add Chart to Comment
Confirm Block

Are you sure you want to block %USER_NAME%?

By doing so, you and %USER_NAME% will not be able to see any of each other's Investing.com's posts.

%USER_NAME% was successfully added to your Block List

Since you’ve just unblocked this person, you must wait 48 hours before renewing the block.

Report this comment

I feel that this comment is:

Comment flagged

Thank You!

Your report has been sent to our moderators for review
Continue with Google
or
Sign up with Email