Judge Orders Penske, Hendrick to Provide Full Depositions to 23XI, Front Row
The ongoing antitrust trial involving 23XI Racing, Front Row Motorsports, and NASCAR has reached a critical stage. Judge Kenneth D. Bell has mandated that Roger Penske and Rick Hendrick participate in full, unrestricted depositions before the trial begins. This decision follows requests from both team owners to limit the scope of questioning regarding their financial matters and to conduct their depositions via Zoom.
Judge’s Ruling on Depositions
In his ruling, Judge Bell emphasized that the trial will proceed fairly and publicly under applicable legal rules. He stated that no company or individual would receive special treatment, countering the motions presented by Penske and Hendrick, who aimed to receive leniency due to their notable status in the motorsport industry.
Key Aspects of the Case
- Trial Start Date: December 1
- Defendants: Roger Penske and Rick Hendrick
- Plaintiffs: 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports
NASCAR has indicated that both Penske and Hendrick are expected to testify at the trial. Consequently, the plaintiffs have the right to depose these individuals before the trial commences, enabling them to prepare adequately for cross-examination.
Arguments Presented
23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports argued that Hendrick and Penske’s decision to testify on behalf of NASCAR nullifies their request for protection from deposition. They asserted that having agreed to take the stand at the trial, both team owners must also comply with pre-trial questioning. Additionally, the plaintiffs argued that since Penske and Hendrick offered to be available in Charlotte for the trial, there was no justification for them to refuse an in-person deposition.
Outcome of Protective Order Motion
Ultimately, Judge Bell denied the motion for a protective order filed by Penske and Hendrick, reinforcing the guidelines that govern case proceedings. This ruling marks a significant moment in the ongoing legal battle, ensuring transparency and fairness in the judicial process.
The developments in this case highlight the complexities of motorsport regulations and the challenges faced by teams in maintaining fair competition within NASCAR.
