The Sunday Ticket antitrust case is going back to trial, but only on the part that carries a number. On Friday 30 October the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the jury finding that the NFL and its clubs broke federal antitrust law in pricing the package, and simultaneously vacated the damages award that followed it.
For the league it is a loss and a reprieve in the same opinion. The finding of wrongdoing is back on the record; the roughly $4.7 billion attached to it is not.
What the Sunday Ticket antitrust ruling decided
The appeals panel told the district court to reinstate the jury’s liability verdict and to hold a fresh trial on damages. The liability question was settled by a jury in July 2024 and the trial judge had left that part intact even while setting aside the award.
On the money, the panel was blunt. The award was “not based on a proper consideration of the evidence” and rested on “speculation or guesswork”. The panel also concluded that the trial court “abused its discretion” by excluding expert testimony, and that exclusion is why the damages phase has to be run again rather than simply recalculated.
The arithmetic behind a $4.7 billion headline
Antitrust awards are trebled when a verdict becomes a judgment, so the original figure was never the final exposure. Spread across the league, the first verdict worked out at roughly $440 million per club before statutory interest, which is the kind of sum that reshapes a balance sheet rather than denting one.
None of that is fixed now. A second jury may come in lower, in the same range, or higher, and the trebling only applies once a judgment exists. Courthouse News covered the opinion as a reversal of the league’s win rather than a win for either side outright.
What happens from here
The case goes back to federal court in Los Angeles for the damages retrial. Before that, either party can seek rehearing by a wider Ninth Circuit panel or ask the Supreme Court to take the case, although a petition may be premature until damages are settled.
Readers interested in how consumer claims of this shape work at a smaller scale will find our notes on small claims court useful, and the lemon law explainer covers the other common route where a product or service is not what was sold.
What is settled and what is not
Settled is the liability finding. A jury concluded in July 2024 that the league and its clubs violated federal antitrust law in pricing the package, the trial judge never disturbed that part, and the appeals court has now put it formally back in place.
Unsettled is every figure attached to it. The panel vacated the award as speculation rather than reducing it, so there is no number on the table at all until a second jury produces one, and no date has been set for that trial. Trebling only applies once a judgment exists, which means the headline exposure people quote for this case is currently hypothetical.
