Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, STATE UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES—N.D. Tex.: NFL, Dallas Cowboys sack Texas DTPA claims, (Aug 8, 2014)

By Greg Hammond, J.D.

Super Bowl XLV ticketholders faced a setback on Wednesday, when their Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) claims—arising from alleged misrepresentations over the actual condition of game day seating—were largely rejected. In partially granting the National Football League’s motion to dismiss, the federal district court in Dallas determined that only one DTPA claim, based on fraudulent inducement by omission, was adequately alleged (Greco v. Jones, August 6, 2014, Lynn, B.).

Background. Ticketholders to the February 6, 2011 Super Bowl filed suit against the NFL and the Dallas Cowboys, alleging misrepresentation and failure to disclose the actual condition of game day seating at Cowboys Stadium. The ticketholders alleged that they were: (1) relocated to different seats within the stadium; (2) given delayed access to seats; (3) denied access to stadium seating altogether; or (4) received seats with obstructed views. They claimed—in part—fraudulent inducement and violations of the DTPA. The NFL and the Dallas Cowboys—which is comprised of the Dallas Cowboys Football Club, Ltd., JWJ Corp., Cowboys Stadium G.P., LLC, Cowboys Stadium, L.P., and Blue & Silver, Inc.—moved to dismiss the ticketholders’ claims.

Fraudulent inducement claims. In support of their fraudulent inducement claims, the ticketholders argued that the NFL and Dallas Cowboys placed false representations on the tickets, stating that ticketholders would be able to enjoy pregame festivities beginning at 1:00 p.m., and would have assigned seats for the game at 5:00 p.m. They also alleged that by omitting any reference to obstructed views, which is required by NFL guidelines, the NFL and Dallas Cowboys affirmatively represented that the views of the game and the Video Replay Board would not be obstructed.

As a preliminary matter, the court noted that the ticketholders’ contracts were only with the NFL, so all fraudulent inducement claims against the Dallas Cowboys were dismissed with prejudice. In addition, it found that the only viable claim against the NFL was fraudulent inducement by omission. Therefore, ticketholders who can claim that (1) they were unaware of those obstructions prior to purchase, (2) non-obstruction was a material fact on which they relied, and (3) the NFL knew the seats had obstructed views were able to state a valid fraudulent inducement claim against the NFL.

DTPA claims. Ticketholders also brought DTPA claims against the NFL and the Dallas Cowboys for false, misleading, or deceptive acts; breach of express and implied warranty; and unconscionable actions. Similar to the fraudulent inducement claims, the court dismissed the DTPA claims against the Dallas Cowboys, as the contracts were between the NFL and the ticketholders.

The court next determined that ticketholders failed to show any express or implied warranty, because express warranties must be explicit, and implied warranties apply only to the repair or modification of existing tangible goods or property. Unconscionability was also a non-issue in this case as a matter of law, the court decided. However, the court ultimately concluded that DTPA claims regarding false, misleading, or deceptive acts may be brought, but only on the basis of allegations underlying their fraudulent inducement by omission claim.

The case number is 3:13-CV-1005-M.

Attorneys: Christopher S. Ayres for Joseph Greco. R. Thaddeus Behrens (Haynes & Boone LLP) for National Football League. David W. Dodge (McCathern Mooty Hyde Grinke, LLP) for Jerral Wayne Jones.

Companies: National Football League; Dallas Cowboys Football Club, Ltd.; JWJ Corp.; Cowboys Stadium G.P., LLC; Cowboys Stadium, L.P.; Blue & Silver, Inc.

Cases: StateUnfairTradePractices TexasNews