Attorneys for UCLA now claim there is no urgency in resolving a lawsuit filed by the City against the UC Regents.
The City claims that UCLA is attempting to breach its contract with the Rose Bowl Operating Company and move its football team to SoFi Stadium in Inglewood.
Judge Joseph Lipner ruled in the City’s favor earlier this month when he denied a motion to compel arbitration.
Last week, the university appealed that decision shortly after confirming the college plans to play in the Rose Bowl next season. UCLA’s athletics has been struggling financially for nearly a decade, and its losing record isn’t helping the team sell tickets.
The college is using that announcement in an attempt to stay the proceedings.
“Moreover, there is no urgency in resolving this matter because UCLA confirmed that it intends to play its home football games at the Rose Bowl Stadium for the 2026 college football season,”
A hearing on the motion is scheduled for April 21.
The college has filed motions to prevent several college officials from being deposed.
The arbitration clause in the lease is narrowly designed to address specific defects or deficiencies and not attempts to end the contractual relationship altogether, according to Lipner, who also denied motions by the defendants for a stay of the lawsuit pending the outcome of the arbitration.
UCLA claims that a hold on proceedings is again warranted because UCLA would be irreparably harmed if it has to continue litigating in court a case that appellate courts may conclude can be heard only in arbitration, according to the UC Regents’ attorneys’ court papers.
In its opposition to the UC Regents’ arbitration motion, the Rose Bowl Operating Company and the City contended that the regents are focusing on an alternative dispute resolution provision of the agreement that is “deliberately and particularly narrow” and does not take into consideration the contract as a whole.
The provision instead is limited to expeditiously resolving routine, curable performance disputes, according to the Rose Bowl Operating Company/City lawyers’ court papers.
The arguments by the City and the Rose Bowl Operating Company contrasted with those of the UC Regents’ lawyers who contend that the plaintiffs are bound by an arbitration agreement and that “no exceptions apply to RBOC’s claims.”
In denying a separate motion to compel arbitration filed by Kroenke Sports & Entertainment LLC and Stadco LA LLC to compel arbitration, the judge said the outcome of the request was dependent upon that of the UC Regents and that therefore the Kroenke motion also was denied. In addition, Kroenke and the plaintiffs did not have an arbitration agreement to begin with, the judge said.
The suit filed Oct. 29 seeks to enforce the terms of a lease agreement the plaintiff claims locks UCLA into playing football at the venue until 2044, which the UC Regents’ attorneys acknowledge in their court papers.
College officials hope to get a piece of the premium seating profits at SoFi Stadium. The university does not get a cut of those profits from the Rose Bowl.
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.
