Epic Court Battle Between LIV and the PGA Tour Ends
More than 10 months after Phil Mickelson and 10 other LIV golfers brought a federal antitrust lawsuit against the PGA Tour that shook the sports world, the case has come to an end.
On Friday, attorneys for the PGA Tour filed a stipulation of dismissal in the California court of U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman on behalf of all the parties. The dismissal is “with prejudice,” meaning the legal claims can’t be resurrected at a later date. The parties also entered into mutual release agreements regarding all possible legal actions as of Friday, meaning they contractually agree to not bring any other claims against one another over anything that has happened thus far.
More from Sportico.com
In short, it’s over.
The filing follows the PGA Tour’s announcement on June 6 that the litigation had ended as part of a planned new entity involving the PGA Tour, the DP World Tour and Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund. The entity, which is not yet finalized and is subject to approval by the PGA Tour Policy Board, has drawn scrutiny from the Justice Department and the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee over antitrust and geopolitical concerns.
Although neither LIV nor the PGA Tour “won” the legal war—their case ended in a settlement, after all—the PGA Tour, led by attorney Elliot Peters of Keker, Van Nest & Peters, won all the major battles.
Peters, a former federal prosecutor who successfully defended Lance Armstrong against False Claims Act allegations, convinced Freeman to:
· Deny a temporary restraining order that would have let Talor Gooch, Hudson Swafford and Matt Jones play in the FedEx Cup since the golfers couldn’t show either damages (LIV paid them more) or irreparable harm, meaning harm that money can’t later remedy (LIV calculated how much more it needed to pay the golfers to offset career harm from leaving the PGA Tour).
· Order that the Public Investment Fund of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (PIF), which backs LIV Golf, and PIF’s governor, Yasir Othman Al-Rumayyan, comply with subpoenas in New York City.
· Postpone the trial date.
· Pressure the golfers who sued to comply with pretrial discovery—pressure that led to all the golfers dropping out of the case, leaving LIV to fight solo.
LIV sought a relatively fast victory so that the PGA Tour’s regulations would be declared unenforceable. That outcome would have motivated more top golfers to join LIV. In an ideal timeline for LIV, it could have used the litigation to, in effect, take over the golf world from the PGA Tour.
Instead, LIV faced a slow and complicated path to what early returns indicated would be a loss in court. That trajectory likely played a crucial role in LIV accepting a settlement where it agreed to provide funding, but the PGA Tour will appoint a majority of the new entity’s board of directors to oversee operations, businesses and investments.
While the litigation is over, legal issues aren’t necessarily going away for the PGA Tour or LIV.
In the LIV lawsuit, the PGA Tour capably parried accusations it held monopolistic power over the “buying” of elite golfers’ services. But its new project with LIV Golf and the DP World Tour will create a global league like no other. The three leagues could face litigation over their entity’s potential impact on players’ opportunities to compete.
The PGA Tour and LIV will also need to address golfers who, by joining LIV in contravention of their PGA Tour membership rules, forfeited their PGA Tour memberships. Those golfers will need to reapply to the PGA Tour. Will they have to pay fines? Will they be accepted provisionally? Will they wear a proverbial ‘Scarlet Letter’ or be welcomed back fully? The reconstruction of the PGA Tour could lead golfers who are denied a chance to return a reason to sue.
Also, the new entity could fall apart before it starts. Member golfers, some of whom felt blindsided by the announcement, or the federal government could try to stop it. Business negotiations between the parties could also break down. Any of these disruptions might spawn their own litigation—including, potentially, LIV and the PGA Tour battling in court once again.
But in that scenario, the legal issues would be limited to what happens going forward, not what’s happened to date. The often acrimonious and litigious history of these two leagues can no longer serve as grounds for legal dispute.
It’s over.
Daniel Libit contributed to this story.
