Introduction to the Lawsuit

The City of Pasadena and the Rose Bowl Operating Co. filed a lawsuit Wednesday night to force UCLA to honor the remaining two decades of its contract and keep Bruin football games in the historic stadium through 2044.

Background of the Dispute

The complaint, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court against UCLA and the University of California Regents, alleges that the university has been “unequivocally expressing its intent to abandon the Rose Bowl Stadium and relocate its home football games to SoFi Stadium in Inglewood,” and calls that “a profound betrayal of trust.” UCLA’s lease runs through June 30, 2044, and Pasadena officials say taxpayers have invested more than $150 million in stadium renovations, while recently refinancing another $130 million in bonds for additional capital improvements.

Concerns and Allegations

The filing alleges that UCLA, after years of public assurances that it is staying, has now “chosen to disregard those promises” and has formally notified the plaintiffs that it is “moving on” and that “there’s no way we’re staying long term.” “This lawsuit arises in an era when money too often eclipses meaning and the pursuit of profit threatens to erase the very traditions that breathe life into institutions,” the filing reads. “Some commitments are too fundamental to be traded away.”

Response from UCLA

“While we continue to evaluate the long-term arrangement for UCLA football home games, no decision has been made,” said Mary Osako, UCLA vice chancellor for strategic communications, in a statement to The Times. Although UCLA has yet to file a formal response to the lawsuit, the university disputed the allegations in an exhibit included in the filing. In a letter to Pasadena’s attorney, Nima Mohebbi, UCLA outside counsel David L. Schrader wrote in March that the university has not violated the agreement and that “preliminary discussions” that contemplate a move “do not constitute a material breach for which RBOC would be entitled to a legal or equitable remedy.” Schrader wrote that UCLA “continues to evaluate strategic goals and how to be fiscally responsible and best fulfill its mission.”

Demands and Potential Consequences

The lawsuit asks for a court order that requires UCLA to honor the entirety of its lease. The filing contends that it would be devastating to Pasadena and the stadium were UCLA to violate the agreement, that the harm caused to the city and its residents “could easily exceed a billion dollars (or more),” and that monetary damages could never truly remedy UCLA’s conduct. UCLA quarterback Nico Iamaleava jogs off the field after a 42-37 win over Penn State at the Rose Bowl on Oct. 4. (Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

Analysis and Expert Opinion

Russell Korobkin, a professor in the UCLA School of Law who specializes in contracts and negotiation, said the lawsuit appeared to be a preemptive move by the Rose Bowl to prevent UCLA from simply making a payout as part of a move to a new football home. “The Rose Bowl is saying, by filing the suit, ‘We don’t want your money, we’re going to try to get a court to order you to stay and play at the Rose Bowl,’” Korobkin said. “So that really seems to be ultimately what’s at stake here. One can’t answer this question with complete confidence, but it would just be my prediction that they will not be able to get a specific performance order, that they could probably only recover monetary damages” from UCLA.

Conclusion

The dispute between the Rose Bowl and UCLA over the potential relocation of the university’s football games to SoFi Stadium has significant implications for both parties involved, as well as the city of Pasadena. The outcome of the lawsuit will depend on the court’s interpretation of the contract and the potential damages that could be awarded. As the situation continues to unfold, it remains to be seen whether UCLA will be required to honor its lease and continue playing at the Rose Bowl or if a settlement will be reached.

FAQs

• Q: What is the basis of the lawsuit filed by the Rose Bowl against UCLA?
  A: The lawsuit accuses UCLA of intending to abandon the Rose Bowl Stadium and relocate its home football games to SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, despite having a lease that runs through June 30, 2044.
• Q: How much have taxpayers invested in the Rose Bowl Stadium?
  A: Taxpayers have invested more than $150 million in stadium renovations, and recently refinanced another $130 million in bonds for additional capital improvements.
• Q: What is UCLA’s stance on the allegations?
  A: UCLA has disputed the allegations, stating that it has not violated the agreement and that preliminary discussions about a potential move do not constitute a material breach.
• Q: What are the potential consequences if UCLA violates the agreement?
  A: The harm caused to the city and its residents could exceed a billion dollars, and monetary damages may not be sufficient to remedy UCLA’s conduct.
• Q: What is the predicted outcome of the lawsuit?
  A: It is predicted that the Rose Bowl may not be able to get a specific performance order requiring UCLA to stay, but could potentially recover monetary damages.