Judge rules that Rose Bowl lawsuit against UCLA can proceed

The Rose Bowl’s breach-of-contract case against UCLA is moving forward after a Los Angeles Superior Court judge denied the school’s attempt to dismiss the case. Judge Joseph Lipner rejected UCLA’s anti-SLAPP motion, citing that it was untimely and unsupported by sufficient cause for late filing.

The anti-SLAPP motion, designed to protect individuals and organizations from meritless lawsuits, was filed 125 days after UCLA was served with the complaint. Lipner deemed the late filing as an attempt by UCLA to slow down the proceedings and gain an unfair advantage in the case.

Additionally, Lipner ruled that the Rose Bowl’s case against SoFi Stadium executives for allegedly enticing UCLA to breach its contract through tortious interference could proceed. This ruling allows the Rose Bowl to issue discovery requests and may prompt UCLA to commit to staying at the Pasadena stadium long term.

Nima Mohebbi, a partner at Sidley Austin LLP representing the Rose Bowl and the City of Pasadena, expressed appreciation for the court’s ruling and looks forward to moving the case forward. UCLA has not yet commented on the ruling.

There have been discussions between UCLA and the Rose Bowl for a resolution that would keep the Bruins at their longtime football home through the end of their lease in 2043. UCLA has already committed to playing at the Rose Bowl for the 2026 season.

In October, the Rose Bowl Operating Co. and the City of Pasadena sued UCLA for exploring a move to SoFi Stadium, which would provide the school with a more modern stadium closer to campus and additional revenue opportunities. UCLA currently pays no rent under its lease with the Rose Bowl but is subject to unfavorable terms regarding suite revenue and other income streams.

The Rose Bowl has allowed UCLA to keep revenue from premium seats associated with a new field-level club opening this season. The case continues to unfold as both parties navigate the legal proceedings.