
A recent judgment from a federal jury has sparked significant discussion after it ruled in favor of the U.S. Soccer Federation in an antitrust case initiated by the North American Soccer League (NASL).
In the wake of the decision, legal experts have been vocal about their dissent regarding supposed errors made during the trial.
Larry Buterman, a partner at the law firm Latham & Watkins, asserted that the court’s verdict stands strong and argued that the NASL has no solid grounds for an appeal.
Trial and Verdict
This trial unfolded in Brooklyn, where the jury, which included representation from Winston & Strawn, ultimately concluded that the rival league would not receive any compensation.
They delivered a unanimous verdict siding with Major League Soccer (MLS) and the U.S. Soccer Federation, effectively rebuffing the NASL’s claims of illegal monopolistic practices that supposedly breached antitrust regulations.
Final Dismissal
On Monday, U.S. District Judge Hector Gonzalez offered a final dismissal of the case.
He highlighted that the jury’s deliberation took less than two hours, signaling a strong consensus that the evidence presented fell short of substantiating allegations of conspiracy as outlined by the Sherman Act.
Source: Law.com