Judge Rules Against LIV Golf Motion to Split Complaint Against PGA Tour Into Two Cases

LIV Golf had hoped to move forward with its antitrust complaint against the PGA Tour separately from a complaint that would require LIV to share emails and other information about its contacts with golfers.

In a small procedural win that may have larger consequences, LIV Golf’s motion to split its claim against the PGA Tour and the PGA Tour’s counterclaim into two trials was denied Wednesday in U.S. District Court Northern District of California.

In a four-page order issued by Judge Beth Labson Freeman, the court denied LIV Golf's bifurcation motion filed March 16. Therefore, the dispute between LIV Golf and the PGA Tour will remain a single case that addresses all complaints.

In denying the motion to bifurcate the claims, Judge Freeman stated LIV Golf had the burden of proving it was needed and that the heart of the parties’ dispute centered on whether counter-defendants the Public Investment Fund of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (PIF) and Yasir Al-Rumayyan have information relevant to the PGA Tour’s antitrust claims and the Tour’s defense to those claims.

The PGA Tour has claimed the PIF and Al-Rumayyan have crucial information, including emails with players, broadcasters and TV networks, which will aid in its defense of the antitrust complaint filed by LIV Golf and the counterclaim filed by the Tour.

In a hearing on April 8, where Judge Freeman vacated the original trial date of Jan. 8, 2024, she also discussed the possibility of splitting the cases and while not issuing an order on the question, she made her feelings known about the potential of bifurcating the cases.

“I do see this evidence as potentially relevant to all of the claims and defenses that the Tour is bringing,” Freeman said of the fruits of discovery from PIF and Al-Rumayyan. “So, I just can’t ignore that relevance; I can’t force the defendants [PGA Tour] to go forward with one hand behind their back, and it may be more serious than that.”

LIV Golf has maintained all along the counterclaim filed by the PGA Tour and its antitrust complaint should run on different tracks and that waiting for the discovery from the PIF and Al-Rumayyan should not slow down the original complaint.

Clearly Judge Freeman disagreed.

“The Court notes that the Tour has shown that its counterclaims and Plaintiffs’ antitrust claims will likely involve overlapping facts and evidence,” Freeman said. “Where an overlap of factual issues exists between the claims, courts are reluctant to bifurcate the proceedings.”

Currently, the discovery complaint between the PIF, Al-Rumayyan and the PGA Tour is at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.