Sports Leagues Fire Return Salvo to Stifle $150M Damages Claim

[Wandering Eyes]

The four major United States professional sports leagues and the National College Athletic Association have collectively fired a return legal salvo in an attempt to dismiss a claim by the New Jersey Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association (NJTHA) that Monmouth Park and the state were allegedly deprived of nearly $150 million in revenue while the legality of sports betting was fought all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The case dates to October 2014, when Monmouth’s operator, Darby Development LLC, first believed it had the authority to take sports bets on National Football League games. The leagues joined forces and filed a lawsuit in an attempt to halt the bet-taking, but had to post a $3.4 million bond, which the court deemed to be Monmouth’s projected revenue losses for a month while the temporary restraining order (TRO) was in effect.

But the case ended up taking 42 months—as opposed to just the one month that the bond covered—to resolve.

And when the Supreme Court finally issued its landmark decision to strike down the federal law barring wagering on team sports on May 14, 2018, Monmouth soon after sought damages in U.S. District Court based on all the bet-taking revenue it allegedly lost, extrapolating the initial $3.4 million bond to extend over the entire time frame from when the TRO went into effect until Monmouth was legally allowed to begin accepting wagers.

The leagues’ July 16 memorandum of law in opposition to the NJTHA’s motion for judgment states, in part, “NJTHA is not entitled to recover anything from the TRO bond, and its motion should be denied for several reasons,” outlined as follows:

“First, as a matter of law, NJTHA may not recover damages allegedly sustained after the expiration of the TRO on November 21, 2014.

“Second, NJTHA’s effort to recover more than the amount of the bond for damages allegedly sustained after the expiration of the TRO by asserting that the Leagues acted in bad faith in pursuing their rights under PASPA is frivolous and should be rejected.

“Third, NJTHA is not entitled to recover anything under the bond because, as a matter of law, it was not “wrongfully enjoined” by the TRO.

“And fourth, NJTHA has not proven the existence or amount of any alleged damages during the four weeks that it was restrained by the TRO.”

The NJTHA now has until Aug. 13 to file its reply in federal court.

View the full article