[UPDATE: Adds quote from order and City statement]
UCLA suffered another loss, but this time instead of losing in the Rose Bowl they suffered a devastating loss to the City of Pasadena.
A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge has denied a request by the University of California Regents, on behalf of UCLA, to force arbitration in an ongoing lawsuit with the City and the Rose Bowl Operating Company over the Bruins’ long-term stadium agreement.
In a ruling issued on Tuesday, Judge Joseph Lipner rejected motions by UCLA to compel arbitration and stay the case, allowing the breach-of-contract lawsuit to proceed in court.
“The court DENIES the motions to compel arbitration. The Court DENIES the motions to stay proceedings,” according to the minute order. “UCLA also filed a motion to quash deposition subpoenas and enter a protective order. The Court DENIES UCLA’s motion to quash.”
The judge also denied similar arbitration requests filed by Kroenke Sports & Entertainment LLC and Stadco LA LLC — entities affiliated with SoFi Stadium — as well as UCLA’s motion to quash discovery subpoenas.
The City and the Rose Bowl Operating Company welcomed the ruling and said the ruling allows this case to proceed in court, affirming the City’s right to seek judicial enforcement of its long-term agreement with UCLA.
“For more than forty years, UCLA has benefited from a unique partnership with the City of Pasadena and the Rose Bowl, a partnership that was memorialized in a carefully negotiated contract that extends through 2044,” the statement said. “That agreement was the foundation for hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer-backed investments made to modernize and preserve one of the most iconic sports venues in the world. In return, UCLA made a clear and binding commitment to play its home football games at the Rose Bowl through 2044 and expressly waived any right to terminate that commitment early, and we are confident that a court will agree.”
The statement concludes by saying the City and the Rose Bowl Operating Company remain committed to protecting the public interest, safeguarding taxpayer investments, and ensuring that contractual commitments—especially those involving public institutions and public resources—are honored.”
The dispute centers on the Restated Rose Bowl Agreement, which requires UCLA to play its home football games at the Pasadena stadium through 2044.
The City of Pasadena and the Rose Bowl Operating Company allege UCLA has taken steps toward abandoning the venue in favor of a potential move to SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, actions they argue would violate the lease and harm city finances and contractual relationships tied to stadium operations.
Plaintiffs claim the university’s departure could jeopardize vendor contracts, sponsorships and public revenue streams linked to taxpayer-funded renovations at the Rose Bowl.
The lawsuit, first filed in October 2025 and later expanded, includes claims for breach of contract, anticipatory repudiation, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, declaratory relief and promissory estoppel, along with a tortious-interference claim against stadium-related defendants.
UCLA sought to move the dispute out of court, arguing the stadium lease contains an arbitration provision requiring alternative dispute resolution.
But Lipner ruled the clause is narrowly written and applies only to disputes over whether specific “defects or deficiencies” under the agreement occurred or were cured — not to claims alleging an attempt to terminate or abandon the contract altogether.
The ruling is almost exact language from the City.
The judge found the lawsuit instead focuses on what Pasadena characterizes as UCLA’s efforts to end or evade its core obligation to play home games at the Rose Bowl. Such claims, including anticipatory repudiation — alleging UCLA signaled intent to leave before the lease expires — fall outside the scope of the arbitration language, the court ruled.
Because the arbitration request was denied, the court also rejected motions to halt the litigation and block discovery.
With no arbitration agreement binding the SoFi-related defendants directly, their request to compel arbitration was likewise denied.
The ruling allows the case to proceed in Superior Court as the parties continue to litigate whether UCLA can exit or alter its Rose Bowl obligations before the lease expires in 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.
