rifan muazin
In a significant legal maneuver, 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports have formally requested a North Carolina federal court to compel comprehensive, in-person depositions from NASCAR titans Rick Hendrick and Roger Penske. This action comes as the two teams seek to thoroughly examine the owners of Hendrick Motorsports and Team Penske, who have been unexpectedly added to NASCAR’s witness list for an upcoming antitrust trial.
The legal filing, submitted on Monday, argues that the late inclusion of Hendrick and Penske on NASCAR’s witness roster, without prior indication of their discoverable information, constitutes a strategic maneuver by the sanctioning body. 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports contend that they had inquired multiple times about the potential testimony of Penske and Hendrick, only to be informed that they did not intend to testify. This alleged discrepancy has fueled the teams’ demand for extensive pre-trial questioning.
The core of the dispute lies in the scope and format of these depositions. Hendrick and Penske had previously resisted a full deposition, seeking to limit the topics of discussion and requesting the proceedings be conducted remotely via Zoom, rather than in person. 23XI and Front Row, however, are pushing for direct, in-person examination, viewing the resistance as an attempt to receive preferential treatment.
"Mr. Hendrick and Mr. Penske’s confidentiality concerns about their team financial information cannot justify preventing Plaintiffs from cross-examining them in open court on a plainly relevant topic," the filing states. "If they have a proper basis to move to seal any of this information, they may do so subject to the strict requirements that the Court applies in considering such a motion."
Related News :
- 23XI, Front Row Refine Antitrust Claims Against NASCAR, Focusing on Monopolization Allegations
- NASCAR Stars Shine Bright as Nominees Emerge for Prestigious Autosport Awards
- Federal Judge Deals Significant Blow to NASCAR’s Business Model, Questioning Legality of Charter System
- Seven-Time Champion Jimmie Johnson Set for Historic Return to San Diego on Inaugural NASCAR Street Course
- NASCAR Unveils New Technical Regulations, Paving the Way for Expanded Manufacturer Landscape
While 23XI and Front Row could have challenged NASCAR’s motion to place Hendrick and Penske on the witness stand due to their late addition, the teams appear to be seizing this opportunity to gather critical discoverable information directly from the influential owners. The scope of questioning desired by 23XI and Front Row is broad, encompassing critical aspects of the sport’s economic structure and governance.
The filing details specific areas of inquiry, including the charter system, the contentious 2025 charter renewal negotiations, the economics of team ownership, and NASCAR’s NextGen car program. Furthermore, 23XI and Front Row aim to question Penske regarding his ownership of the IndyCar series. The teams assert their entitlement to probe the basis of the declarations made by Hendrick and Penske, and their personal knowledge on these multifaceted topics, particularly as they relate to NASCAR’s alleged exercise of monopoly power.
A pointed example cited in the filing involves statements made by Jeff Gordon, Hendrick Motorsports’ partner and a member of the Team Negotiating Committee. Gordon publicly stated that Hendrick Motorsports has not been profitable in a decade, despite its status as a long-standing and successful team. 23XI and Front Row intend to question Mr. Hendrick about these assertions and the financial realities of his team under the current charter system, arguing it directly bears on whether NASCAR has compensated racing teams below competitive market rates.
The notion of conducting depositions via Zoom is also being challenged, with 23XI and Front Row highlighting the logistical incongruity. The filing notes in a footnote, "Plaintiffs do not understand how conducting the depositions by Zoom will save time, as Plaintiffs are willing to travel to Mr. Hendrick and Mr. Penske and presumably their counsel will be present in person to defend their depositions regardless."
Beyond financial performance, the teams also intend to question Penske and Hendrick about the preferential treatment they allegedly receive through the charter system. This includes how their charters are compensated more favorably than those of other teams due to historical significance and how Hendrick Motorsports is permitted to operate four charters, exceeding the three-charter limit for new teams.
"Hendrick Motorsports and Team Penske are paid more than other Cup Series teams based on the combination of a historical revenue allocation formula and the fact that Hendrick Motorsports is allowed to have four chartered cars—as opposed to the typical three—which gives them a better cost structure than other teams," the filing outlines. "These facts are highly relevant to their testimony about the charter system and why they accepted the final terms offered by NASCAR for the 2025 Charter Agreement."
The filing further alleges that a lack of a cost cap for Cup Series teams exists because Hendrick and Penske, according to testimony from NASCAR senior executive Scott Prime, prefer to maintain their competitive advantage. These details, 23XI and Front Row argue, are crucial to understanding any potential bias in favor of NASCAR and its leadership, particularly in light of these perceived special preferences.
The teams assert that Hendrick and Penske have "little to complain about" given their voluntary decision to testify after initially indicating they would not. They further contend that a previous court order mandating broad, non-identifying financial records from non-party teams no longer applies to Hendrick and Penske, as their voluntary agreement to testify on behalf of NASCAR fundamentally alters their status in the proceedings.
"At that time, Mr. Hendrick and Mr. Penske were mere third-party bystanders who were not voluntarily agreeing to testify, at NASCAR’s behest, at trial," the filing states. "Having made that voluntary decision to aid Mr. France and NASCAR, they have no basis to resist the scope of cross-examination and inquiry that all trial witnesses must face."
NASCAR’s perspective, as presented in its own court filings, counters the claims made by 23XI and Front Row. The sanctioning body argues that if Penske and Hendrick’s testimony were truly essential to the plaintiffs’ case, they would have been included on 23XI and Front Row’s witness lists and their financial information sought during the discovery phase. NASCAR maintains that 23XI and Front Row strategically took no position on the relevance of specific financial information from non-party teams during discovery.
"Plaintiffs did not include Mr. Hendrick or Mr. Penske on their potential witness lists, so they cannot claim that any of their testimony is essential to Plaintiffs’ case," NASCAR’s filing states. "Nor could Plaintiffs claim that they must have access to additional financial information from Team Penske or Hendrick Motorsports, because Plaintiffs never sought that information during discovery."
NASCAR also asserts that its intended questioning of Hendrick and Penske will be limited in scope. "NASCAR’s questioning will not seek information regarding the teams’ income, expenses, profitability, employee salaries, or payments to drivers."
The sanctioning body further refutes the accusation of "sandbagging" regarding the timing of Hendrick and Penske’s inclusion on the witness list. NASCAR points to its initial disclosures in January 2025, which identified "Owners of NASCAR Cup Series race teams" as likely sources of relevant information. Amended disclosures in March, prior to the close of fact disclosure, provided ample opportunity for 23XI and Front Row to depose the individuals.
NASCAR’s September 10th amended disclosures specifically named Hendrick and Penske, leaving nearly three weeks for depositions under the Case Management Plan. The sanctioning body argues that 23XI and Front Row "never asked for a deposition. Nor did they object to the timing of NASCAR’s amended disclosure. Nor did they move to strike." Instead, NASCAR contends, "they strategically chose to sit on their hands and wait until less than four weeks before trial." Had the teams acted sooner, NASCAR asserts, ample time would have existed for depositions within the discovery period.
The legal battle intensifies as the antitrust trial approaches, with the depositions of two of NASCAR’s most prominent figures now at the center of a procedural and strategic conflict between the sanctioning body and a coalition of team owners. The court’s decision on the scope and format of these depositions is anticipated to have significant implications for the unfolding legal proceedings.
💬 Tinggalkan Komentar dengan Facebook
Author Profile
Latest entries
Nascar CupDecember 10, 2025Shane van Gisbergen’s Iconic No. 97 Red Bull Livery Unveiled for 2026 NASCAR Cup Season Debut
Nascar CupDecember 9, 202523XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports Demand Full Depositions from Penske and Hendrick Ahead of Antitrust Trial
Nascar CupDecember 9, 2025Michael McDowell Puts Retirement on the Backburner, Eyes Continued Competitiveness in NASCAR Cup Series
Nascar CupDecember 9, 2025NASCAR Unveils "RISING" Documentary Series, Offering Unfiltered Glimpse into Young Talent with Hocevar, Love, and Caruth
Jonas Leo
Ali Akbar Rosady
arthur roy sitompul