Update: Judge Whitney sets next dates in second preliminary injunction process. NASCAR response is due December 9. 23XI and Front Row reply due by noon on December 12. The court will then set a date for oral arguments.
___
One day after 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports re-filed their request in district court seeking injunctive relief in in the form of charter status through the duration of their lawsuit against NASCAR, the sanctioning body responded with an argument against the expedited timeline requested by the teams.
NASCAR, through attorney Chris Yates, accuses the teams through attorney Jeffrey Kessler as playing games with the timing of filing the modified injunction request a week after withdrawing the appeal of the first request that was denied by the court.
Since then, the teams say the factors of the case have changed and that irreparable harm is imminent, citing three redacted reasons and an unredacted reason revolving NASCAR’s decision to remove a ‘lawsuit release’ clause from the open agreement.
The teams wanted a response filed by December 6 and NASCAR wanted it to be due on December 9. The teams wanted a hearing by December 12 or 13 and NASCAR wanted at the courts discretion.
“Plaintiffs’ motion to expedite should be denied. Plaintiffs tactically delayed filing their new motion for a preliminary injunction for over a week, intentionally dropping it on NASCAR and the Court on the eve of the Thanksgiving holiday after first posting about it on social media many hours before filing.
“In that post, Plaintiffs’ counsel described that Plaintiffs were submitting a second preliminary injunction motion, but Plaintiffs’ counsel did not file that motion until hours later and did not provide the unredacted version to Defendants’ counsel until another two hours later—just hours before midnight (after re-posting their social media posting about the second preliminary injunction motion in the interim).”
NASCAR’s latest filing says that the ‘expedited proposal fails to provide … sufficient time to review and investigate, particularly given the Thanksgiving holiday weekend and the fact that Defendants are working to prepare an answer and responsive briefing that are due on December 2,’ so they just want the same amount of time from the previous injunction filing that did not fall over holiday period.
Again, NASCAR through Yates argued that the teams and Kessler knew a week ago they were going to refile and intentionally waited right before the holidays for tactical reasons. NASCAR and Yates issued the following proposal:
- December 9: NASCAR opposition response (a day of additional time compared to teams’ proposed length because otherwise deadline falls on a Sunday
- December 12: Teams’ reply
“If the Court were to adopt this alternative schedule, Defendants could have a reasonable amount of time to respond given an impending holiday, and the motion would still be ripe for a hearing anytime after December 12 or earlier, depending on when Plaintiffs filed their reply. Additionally, Plaintiffs could choose to forego a reply or file their reply brief in advance of the deadline in order to have their motion heard earlier.”
The full document
Lawsuit timeline
23XI Racing, Front Row decline to sign NASCAR’s final 2025-2031 charter document
Why 23XI, Front Row filed a lawsuit against NASCAR
23XI, Front Row makes his case in antitrust lawsuit against NASCAR
Richard Childress says he had ‘no choice’ but to sign charter document
How drivers feel about the lawsuit
Michael Jordan comments on his team’s lawsuit against NASCAR
Meet NASCAR’s antitrust defense lawyer
NASCAR files injunction to be included in charter system through lawsuit
NASCAR motions against team’s preliminary injunction request
NASCAR, teams consent to redacting charter details in filings
Teams make case for injunctive relief, expedited discovery
NASCAR’s lengthy rebuttal to injunction, lawsuit
Teams respond to NASCAR response over injunction
23XI, Front Row and NASCAR go to court over injunctions
Judge rules against teams preliminary injunction request
Denny Hamlin says 23XI may not race next year
What preliminary injunction denial means for lawsuit
NASCAR drops ‘lawsuit release clause’ in open agreement
Appeal timeline rebuttal filed by NASCAR
Why 23XI may not have to race in the Clash without charters
Teams drop appeal, may re-file in district court
23XI, Front Row re-file injunction request
NASCAR opposes expedited timeline