A judge said Monday he is inclined to deny a motion by the UC Regents to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Rose Bowl Operating Co. and the city of Pasadena that alleges UCLA has considered playing its future football games elsewhere besides the Rose Bowl.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Joseph Lipner issued a tentative ruling indicating that he is poised to deny the UC’s anti-SLAPP motion because it is “untimely and unsupported by sufficient cause” to permit a filing at this time.
“Because UCLA had an ability to raise these issues at the outset of this case, UCLA is not prejudiced by the court’s decision to not reach the merits of the anti-SLAPP,” Lipner wrote.
The judge said he was not therefore ruling on the merits of the motion. The state’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) law is intended to prevent people from using courts, and potential threats of a lawsuit, to intimidate those who are exercising their First Amendment rights.
The judge also said he is inclined to find in a separate motion that only one of five causes of action cited by the UC Regents, for promissory estoppel, may need further shoring up. Promissory estoppel is a legal doctrine that allows a court to enforce a promise, even without a formal contract or mutual exchange of something of value.
Lipner is scheduled to hear arguments Tuesday before issuing a final ruling or taking the case under submission.
The RBOC and the city of Pasadena contend in the lawsuit filed last Oct. 29 that the Bruins are wrongfully exploring options to move their future home games to another venue, including SoFi Stadium in Inglewood. The RBOC’s suit seeks to enforce the terms of a lease agreement the plaintiff claims locks UCLA into playing football at the venue until 2044.
Get our daily Pasadena newspaper in your email box. Free.
Get all the latest Pasadena news, more than 10 fresh stories daily, 7 days a week at 7 a.m.
