Courtroom drama gives 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports fresh momentum. In a hearing that briefly turned the spotlight from the racetrack to the courthouse, U.S. District Judge Keneth D. Bell granted a partial summary judgment that sharply undercut NASCAR’s bid to point to IndyCar or Formula 1 as substitutes, a legal pivot that stunned observers and forced NASCAR to recalibrate its defense.

The legal pressure on NASCAR intensified dramatically following the market definition ruling, prompting the plaintiffs to seek testimony from the sport’s most powerful team owners, Rick Hendrick and Roger Penske. Although NASCAR has not objected to this decision, they themselves do not want to get entangled too much in this legal storm, trying to back out of the ongoing lawsuit in its final moments.

Why Hendrick and Penske are fighting the courtroom demand

Rick Hendrick and Roger Penske are attempting to limit their involvement in the escalating antitrust lawsuit. Both team owners have filed a request with the court seeking either not to be deposed or to have ‘guardrails’ put in place to limit their testimony to declarations previously filed.

The request comes despite a motion being granted allowing 23XI and FRM to depose them, as 23XI alleges Hendrick and Penske were designated as witnesses by NASCAR after the discovery deadline. Hendrick, the owner of HMS, a 15-time Cup Series champion organization, and Penske, the owner of Team Penske, a 5-time Cup Series champion organization, represent the established financial and competitive elite of the garage.

Both of their powerful organizations signed the 2025 charter agreement presented by NASCAR, which the plaintiffs have challenged as an “unlawful monopoly.” In a filing prior to this deposition request, NASCAR presented declarations from numerous team owners, including Hendrick and Penske, who affirmed their support for the charter system, with NASCAR arguing the lawsuit is “an attempt to renegotiate an agreement” that they and other teams honored.

Earlier in October, both teams had given their statements speaking about the impact of the charter system and the uncertainty created by this ongoing lawsuit. Hendrick had stated, “I ultimately decided that it was in the best interests of Hendrick Motorsports to move forward with the 2025 Charter Agreement as opposed to losing the Charter system altogether… Undoing what we have collectively negotiated will not only result in immeasurable damage to our sport and our respective businesses, it will, most importantly, hurt the people and families that depend on us for their livelihoods… More than anything, I hope the matter is resolved in a way that does not put the sport at risk.“

While Penske had added to that sentiment, noting, “My belief in the value of the NASCAR Charter system is confirmed by the fact that, based on my experience with NASCAR’s Charter system since 2016, I decided to create a Charter-type system in IndyCar. In 2024, the NTT INDY CAR SERIES and all teams racing full time in IndyCar entered into a charter agreement effective for the 2025 season. The IndyCar Charter has some similarities to the NASCAR Charter and I believe has brought value to our series.”

It’s clear which side they’re on. The plaintiffs’ attorney, Jeffrey Kessler, however, argued that these very declarations reinforce their position that teams “cannot survive without them,” essentially proving NASCAR’s “monopoly power” over the premier stock car racing market, which a judge recently acknowledged. The court’s decision on the request will be pivotal, as the lawsuit heads toward a trial date set for December 1.

23XI and Front Row, the lawsuit filers, know that allowing a full deposition of figures as influential as Hendrick and Penske could unlock critical, potentially sensitive, information regarding the financial health of the charter system. It could expose the negotiations of the 2025 charter agreement and the alleged disparity in revenue sharing that prompted the lawsuit in the first place. However, another twist has emerged from the plaintiff’s side.

Top Stories

FOX Earns Rare Moment of Respect as NFL Honors NASCAR Legend Live on Air

NASCAR Radio Host Rejects Denny Hamlin’s Warning Amidst Call for Ex-Fox Broadcaster’s Apology

Corey LaJoie Pokes Joey Logano With Backhanded Dig After Star NFL Appearance

Ford Star’s Future in Doubt as 33-Year-Old Rumored to Jump Ship Amid Contract Uncertainty

Racing Broadcaster Gets Emotional as He Warns Fans Against What NASCAR Has Lost

Denny Hamlin and Michael Jordan earn partial court victory in NASCAR lawsuit

Denny Hamlin’s heartbreak at Phoenix Raceway wasn’t just about missing another Cup Series title; it was also tied to a much bigger off-track battle. The ongoing antitrust lawsuit involving his 23XI Racing team and FRM has weighed heavily on him for over a year. But after a disappointing race weekend, some good news finally arrived in court as the plaintiffs earned a crucial win against NASCAR and its leadership under Jim France.

Judge Kenneth D. Bell ruled in favor of defining NASCAR’s competitive sphere as “Premier Stock-Car Racing,” a move that strengthened the teams’ claims of monopolistic control. As Bob Pockrass summarized, “Trial will be focused on whether NASCAR unlawfully exercised its power in that market.”

The decision allows the plaintiffs to refine their focus, dropping one part of the lawsuit and concentrating on whether NASCAR used its monopoly power illegally. The Athletic’s Jeff Gluck also reported, “They originally claimed NASCAR violated both Section 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, but now the teams are going to focus only on Section 2.”

This update follows an October hearing in which NASCAR argued for a broader definition of the market, encompassing other professional racing series. However, Judge Bell rejected that logic, calling it inconsistent. He noted, “In opposing Plaintiffs’ relevant market, NASCAR now contends that the same motorsports that could not supply racing teams to the Cup Series are suddenly readily available substitutes…”

With this momentum, 23XI, FRM, and potentially other Cup Series teams are preparing for the next phase of their legal push against the sport’s governing body, scheduled in December this year.