NASCAR files for summary judgment in legal case vs 23XI, FRM

NASCAR filed a motion late Friday asking the U.S. District Court for a summary judgment in its ongoing battle with 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports.

“Plaintiffs’ frontal assault on the NASCAR Charter system should not be permitted to proceed to trial,” the motion states. “Plaintiffs cannot succeed on either of their Sherman Act claims, including their claim that the Charter Agreement itself is an unlawful agreement in restraint trade. … Plaintiffs’ case should come to an end (as the garage wants) so that the focus can return to exciting racing on the track for the remainder of 2025 and planning can begin for a pivotal 2026 season.”

NASCAR gave the following grounds for filing the motion:

"1. There is no genuine dispute of material fact that Plaintiffs’ claims are time-barred. The statute of limitations for Sherman Act claims is four years. The bulk of the conduct Plaintiff challenges occurred between 2016 and 2019. Claims based on that conduct are long expired. Plaintiffs’ reliance on the continuing violation doctrine is misplaced; that doctrine has no applicability here.

2. There is no genuine dispute of material fact that Plaintiffs voluntarily and repeatedly released their claims. The Fourth Circuit already upheld that release language as 'standard' contractual language that released claims based on all sorts of prior conduct, including antitrust claims.

3. There is no genuine dispute of material fact that Plaintiffs put forward a single, aggregated damages number for a purported 'course of conduct,' including time-barred conduct. Plaintiffs fail to distinguish damages for actionable and non-actionable conduct, rendering Plaintiffs’ damages evidence inapplicable and leaving the jury only to speculate.

4. There is no genuine dispute of material fact that Plaintiffs lack standing to assert their claims. Plaintiffs concede they are not trying to start their own competing racing series. Thus, the allegedly exclusionary provisions in NASCAR’s racetrack sanctions and Charter Agreements could not have caused them any harm. Plaintiffs also never signed the 2025 Charter Agreements and are not bound by any provisions therein. And Plaintiffs’ damages expert conceded that he offers no opinion that the acquisitions caused Plaintiffs harm.

5. There is no genuine dispute of material fact that 23XI entered the Cup Series eyes wide open. 23XI understood the terms of the Charter, believed that they were not competitive, and decided to go forward anyway. 23XI cannot now complain of being locked in. Plaintiffs’ gerrymandered, fail-safe, alleged market should be rejected as a matter of law, even if the testimony of their expert satisfied Rule 702, which it does not.

6. Finally, there is no genuine dispute of material fact that Plaintiffs’ Section 1 claim fails for lack of proof. Plaintiffs fail to provide any evidence on essential elements under the rule of reason. This is fatal at summary judgment."

Included in the filing were declarations from multiple NASCAR team owners or executives. Rick Hendrick, Roger Penske, Joe Gibbs, and Brad Keselowski were among them. The others included Carl Long, B.J. McLeod, Gordon Smith, Rick Ware, Cal Wells, and Jon Wood.

“Today’s filing demonstrates that NASCAR’s charter system has the support of the race teams throughout the garage, and that the 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports lawsuit is not in the best interest of the sport,” a NASCAR statement said after the filing was made. “This lawsuit is not about antitrust; it is merely an attempt to renegotiate an agreement that was signed and is being honored by all other race teams. Together with our race team partners, we remain committed to delivering the best of stock car racing to our fans every weekend through our championship on Nov. 2, including this Sunday on the Roval at Charlotte Motor Speedway.”

23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports previously filed a motion for summary judgment on their antitrust lawsuit. The hearing on that motion is scheduled for Oct. 21.

“The declarations submitted by the various teams are supportive of my clients' position,” said Jeffrey Kessler, the lead counsel for 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports. “My clients are not, and never have been, seeking to eliminate the charter system. They have supported charters because teams cannot survive without them. The declarations from team owners and executives acknowledge this same economic reality. Nor do they excuse NASCAR’s anticompetitive conduct or its unlawful monopoly, points 23XI and Front Row have maintained from the start.

“Many teams have expressed a desire to resolve this matter, a goal my clients share, but NASCAR has yet to demonstrate a similar willingness to engage in meaningful resolution. We are confident NASCAR’s summary judgment motion is not going to succeed. This lawsuit has always been about making NASCAR more competitive and fair for the benefit of drivers, sponsors, teams, and fans who love the sport. NASCAR's new motion changes nothing, and we look forward to presenting our case at trial on December 1.”