The Ninth Circuit on Friday ordered the district court to reinstate a jury’s antitrust liability verdict against the National Football League (NFL) and hold a new damages trial.
The jury awarded residential subscribers $4,610,331,671.74 and commercial subscribers $96,928,272.90. The appeals ruling does not reinstate those sums as damages; the district court must determine any amount in a new trial.
The panel found that U.S. District Judge Philip S. Gutierrez erred by excluding testimony from subscriber economists Daniel Rascher and Douglas Zona. It said jurors should have considered challenges to the economists’ methods and conclusions. Circuit Judge Anthony D. Johnstone wrote that “Opinions are neither unfounded nor unreliable merely because they are impeachable.”
The appeals court also upheld the order for a damages retrial because the jury’s calculation did not follow the district court’s instructions. The panel said the residential calculation compared a list price with a lower estimate of the price paid, which showed a discount rather than an overcharge. It also did not account for differences in prices paid by commercial subscribers.
Subscribers alleged that agreements pooling NFL teams’ broadcast rights gave DirecTV exclusive distribution of out-of-market games, restricting competition and raising costs. The court describes the class period as June 2011 through February 2023. The Ninth Circuit had revived the case in 2019 after an earlier dismissal.
In a statement to The Associated Press, the NFL described its distribution approach as “by far the most fan-friendly distribution model in all of sports and entertainment.” The Associated Press reported that attorneys for both sides were considering their options after the ruling.
The case returns to the district court to reinstate the liability verdict and conduct another damages trial. The appeals court set no date for that proceeding.
