Judge over turns Sunday ticket verdict on appeal

[CowboyoWales]

I'll be shocked if this is the end of the case. You know they will be back in court again.

Yep, especially with the recorded summing up ....
U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez ruled that the testimony of two witnesses for the subscribers had flawed methodologies
"Without the testimonies of Dr. [Daniel] Rascher and Dr. [John] Zona, no reasonable jury could have found class-wide injury or damages," Gutierrez wrote at the end of his 16-page ruling.

Im unsure whether the judge can make such outright presumptive reasoning unless the evidence was egregious....and if that were the case, The Defense should of put up a better show at trial.

As you say, this is probably not going away.

 

[Brax]

Waste of the jury’s time,

 

[DogFace]

Philip S. Gutierrez is a judge on the United States District Court for the Central District of California. He joined the court in 2007 after being nominated by President George W. Bush(R). Gutierrez served as the chief judge of the court from 2020-2024.[1]

 

[Creeper]

A little history about this case before I comment on what the judge just did. This case was originally filed in 2015. In 2017, Judge Philip Gutierrez dismissed the lawsuit. Lawyers for consumers filed an appeal to the 9th circuit court and the appeals court ordered the lawsuit reinstated in 2019. Judge Gutierrez was ordered to preside over a case he had previously dismissed! That's how we got to the jury verdict that awarded NFL Sunday Ticket subscribers $4.7 billion in damages.

A couple of days ago Judge Gutierrez signaled he had an issue with the amount of the award and the NFL filed a motion to challenge the award and the verdict. Gutierrez claimed the jury did not follow his instructions when calculating the award. But yesterday he threw out the verdict in its entirety claiming the jury was a "run-away" jury. He also claimed that two witnesses for the plaintiffs should not have testified and that without their testimony no reasonable jury would have found the NFL had violated anti-trust laws to overcharge consumers. He was the presiding judge that allowed the testimony of these two witnesses at trial. Why blame the jury that made its decision based on the testimony the judge allowed?

Overturning a jury award is not that unusual. Judges adjust awards all the time when juries get a little overzealous. Appeals courts do the same thing. But tossing a jury finding of liability? That seems like a more extreme alternative. He could have ordered a new hearing on the amount of the award. He could have ordered a new trial with a new jury. He could have made the NFL file an appeal and go through the appeals process. The decision he chose to repudiate the jury is shocking.

The lawyers for consumers can still appeal the judge's decision. The appeal would go back to the 9th circuit court that reinstated the trial in 2019. I wonder how that court will view the judge's decision to throw out the jury's verdict after he dismissed the case previously and they forced him to reinstate it. The appeals court has a few different options they can take. A new trial, with a new judge is one. They can overturn the judge and reinstate the jury verdict. I would be shocked if they allow this case to end like this. I think this case will continue for a few more years.

I never felt this was a strong case for consumers in the first place, but the judge's actions yesterday are a bit outrageous to me. There are remedies for out of control juries which give both sides the due process they are entitled to. Tossing a jury verdict arbitrarily is the most extreme.

 

[Praxit]

So, I'm not getting my $5

..not to worry, McDonald's has your back.. ..

 

[gtb1943]

A little history about this case before I comment on what the judge just did. This case was originally filed in 2015. In 2017, Judge Philip Gutierrez dismissed the lawsuit. Lawyers for consumers filed an appeal to the 9th circuit court and the appeals court ordered the lawsuit reinstated in 2019. Judge Gutierrez was ordered to preside over a case he had previously dismissed! That's how we got to the jury verdict that awarded NFL Sunday Ticket subscribers $4.7 billion in damages.

A couple of days ago Judge Gutierrez signaled he had an issue with the amount of the award and the NFL filed a motion to challenge the award and the verdict. Gutierrez claimed the jury did not follow his instructions when calculating the award. But yesterday he threw out the verdict in its entirety claiming the jury was a "run-away" jury. He also claimed that two witnesses for the plaintiffs should not have testified and that without their testimony no reasonable jury would have found the NFL had violated anti-trust laws to overcharge consumers. He was the presiding judge that allowed the testimony of these two witnesses at trial. Why blame the jury that made its decision based on the testimony the judge allowed?

Overturning a jury award is not that unusual. Judges adjust awards all the time when juries get a little overzealous. Appeals courts do the same thing. But tossing a jury finding of liability? That seems like a more extreme alternative. He could have ordered a new hearing on the amount of the award. He could have ordered a new trial with a new jury. He could have made the NFL file an appeal and go through the appeals process. The decision he chose to repudiate the jury is shocking.

The lawyers for consumers can still appeal the judge's decision. The appeal would go back to the 9th circuit court that reinstated the trial in 2019. I wonder how that court will view the judge's decision to throw out the jury's verdict after he dismissed the case previously and they forced him to reinstate it. The appeals court has a few different options they can take. A new trial, with a new judge is one. They can overturn the judge and reinstate the jury verdict. I would be shocked if they allow this case to end like this. I think this case will continue for a few more years.

I never felt this was a strong case for consumers in the first place, but the judge's actions yesterday are a bit outrageous to me. There are remedies for out of control juries which give both sides the due process they are entitled to. Tossing a jury verdict arbitrarily is the most extreme.

a well reasoned response
Makes sense as well
the judge making that claim about the witnesses I think is the weakest part of his ruling most subject to overturn
honestly I thought the formula used by the Jury was more realistic anyway
they were using the actual costs the subscribers paid not a number the Judge demanded

 

[DallasEast]

A couple of days ago Judge Gutierrez signaled he had an issue with the amount of the award and the NFL filed a motion to challenge the award and the verdict. Gutierrez claimed the jury did not follow his instructions when calculating the award. But yesterday he threw out the verdict in its entirety claiming the jury was a "run-away" jury. He also claimed that two witnesses for the plaintiffs should not have testified and that without their testimony no reasonable jury would have found the NFL had violated anti-trust laws to overcharge consumers. He was the presiding judge that allowed the testimony of these two witnesses at trial. Why blame the jury that made its decision based on the testimony the judge allowed?

That was a really good overall breakdown observation but above is what puzzles me the most. The judge's logic does not flow well at all.

 

[baltcowboy]

Not good news for Jerry. He was hinting at the lawsuit was a reason why the Cowboys didn’t spend money in the offseason. It sucks for us fans as well for the fact we have to continue to buy this overpriced garbage product.