LIV Gets Small Procedural Win vs. PGA Tour, Pushes Court to Keep Trial on Track for Jan. 2024
TUCSON, Ariz. – In what could be considered a small win for LIV Golf, the Private Investment Fund of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and its governor Yasir Al-Rumayyan, a court ordered a stay of motion on the enforcement of subpoenas against LIV Golf, effectively erasing an earlier procedural win for the PGA Tour, according to court documents obtained by Sports Illustrated.
During the discovery process, the PGA Tour learned information that led to its deeper examination of the involvement of the PIF and Al-Rumayyan, specifically in support of the PGA Tour’s counterclaim filed against LIV Golf.
On March 15, in a five-page ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Beth Labson Freeman stayed an order issued on Feb. 9 by Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen that addressed the enforceability of subpoenas issued against third parties, PIF and Al-Rumayyan.
Earlier this month, PIF and Al-Rumayyan challenged Judge van Keulen’s order, which held that the Tour’s subpoenas directed at PIF and Al-Rumayyan were enforceable. Judge Freeman’s ruling stays the enforcement of those subpoenas while the court considers the merits of PIF and Al-Rumayyan’s challenge.
In a separate motion, also obtained by Sports Illustrated, LIV Golf has asked that the original complaint of antitrust and the PGA Tour’s counterclaim be “bifurcated”.
LIV contends that the issues that have slowed down discovery and the potential of missing the window for the Jan. 2024 trial date are due to the PGA Tour’s counterclaim, rather than the original antitrust claim.
Specifically, the ongoing issue of access to the PIF and Al-Rumayyan are addressed in the counterclaim and could potentially be determined in an appellate court.
“The likelihood that PIF possess evidence relevant to Plaintiffs’ antitrust claims is small at best,” states the LIV motion filed on March 16. “A substantial delay in the trial poses an existential threat to LIV and the livelihood of Player Plaintiffs and could enable the Tour to circumvent antitrust scrutiny through attrition; and a resolution of Plaintiffs’ claims would likely moot or otherwise resolve the counterclaims, which appear to have no value apart from their role as an excuse to force a postponement of the trial.”