rifan muazin
Two of NASCAR’s most influential team owners, Roger Penske and Rick Hendrick, are actively pushing back against the scope of court-ordered depositions related to the ongoing antitrust lawsuit filed by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports against NASCAR. The legal maneuver comes just days after both titans of the sport were formally requested for testimony, creating a significant development in a case that has been simmering for months.
The core of the dispute lies in the plaintiffs’ perceived attempt to broaden the deposition questioning beyond the initially agreed-upon parameters. Attorneys representing Hendrick and Penske argue that their clients find themselves in an "unenviable position of being forced to give expansive and unnecessary deposition testimony." They contend that both owners had previously agreed to provide limited testimony on non-confidential matters directly relevant to the trial, specifically concerning public statements they made urging a settlement between the parties. This willingness to testify stemmed from their long-standing relationships with NASCAR’s leadership, particularly Jim France.
However, according to the filing, this agreement has been "morphed into an effort by the Plaintiffs to seek testimony potentially regarding [Hendrick Motorsports’] and [Team Penske’s] highly confidential financial and other business information." This expansion of inquiry, the legal team asserts, goes against the spirit of the initial understanding and risks exposing proprietary data that could harm their respective racing organizations.
The timeline of events highlights the rapid escalation. Hendrick and Penske were initially approached for depositions earlier in the week. This followed claims by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports that NASCAR had engaged in "sandbagging" by naming them to a witness list without providing the plaintiff teams adequate opportunity for discovery and due diligence.
Related News :
- NASCAR Pivots to Authenticity, Embracing "Badass Origin Story" in Fresh Marketing Strategy
- NASCAR Unveils Comprehensive 2026 Broadcast Schedule and Start Times Across All Three National Series
- Chase Elliott Secures Record Eighth Consecutive NASCAR Cup Series Most Popular Driver Award
- Seven-time NASCAR Cup Series champion Jimmie Johnson Set to Compete in Historic San Diego Street Race
- Phoenix Practice Thrown into Chaos by Widespread Tire Failures Ahead of Championship Decider
Adam Ross, the lawyer representing Hendrick and Penske, clarified that NASCAR had only recently approached the two prominent figures. The request for their testimony was specifically linked to their submitted declarations, which advocated for a resolution to the lawsuit. Ross emphasized in his filing that neither Hendrick nor Penske desires to be involved in the litigation and have consistently stated they will not "take sides." Their agreement to testify was conditional on a limited scope, acknowledging their decades-long association with Jim France.
The fundamental objection from Hendrick and Penske centers on the perceived inappropriateness of discussing their teams’ financial records and the intricate details surrounding the negotiation and establishment of the 2016 charter agreement. They maintain that such information is highly confidential and directly competitive.
A critical point of contention is the plaintiffs’ refusal to narrow their questioning, despite discussions between legal counsel. Ross’s filing indicates that immediately after the plaintiffs filed their Motion for Leave to depose Hendrick and Penske, and before the court granted it, a meeting occurred. During this meeting, Ross explained NASCAR’s agreement to limit the testimony to the previously submitted declarations. He proposed that if the plaintiffs adhered to this narrow scope, the depositions could proceed without objection. However, the plaintiffs reportedly rejected this compromise, signaling their intent to delve into "numerous questions…regarding their respective race teams’ highly confidential business and financial records, private communications regarding the negotiations leading up to the initial 2016 Charter Agreement, and other highly confidential topics."
The legal team for Hendrick and Penske is leveraging a prior court order from June 25, 2025, which they argue "significantly limits" the information that non-party teams are compelled to provide. This previous order established an agreement where teams, through a third-party intermediary, submitted broad financial data related to average per-car numbers to NASCAR. Crucially, this data was anonymized and did not include identifying information about the specific teams.
The filing underscores the potential ramifications of allowing the plaintiffs to pursue their current line of questioning. It suggests that such testimony "will undermine the entirety of the Court’s decision as related to [Hendrick Motorsports] and [Team Penske] and potentially allow the Parties (or the media or general public) to ‘reverse engineer’ the anonymized team information to back out [Hendrick Motorsports] and [Team Penske] in an effort to identify the sources of the other team information." This outcome would directly contravene the court’s prior directive to protect the anonymity of the submitted financial data.
Adding to their concerns, Hendrick and Penske highlight the timing of these depositions. With the Thanksgiving holiday approaching and the trial drawing nearer, they argue that the current circumstances impose an undue burden. Their motion requests that the depositions be permitted to take place remotely via Zoom and, crucially, be strictly confined to the limited scope that upholds the protections established by the June order.
The filing further elaborates on the competitive landscape. It states that Hendrick Motorsports and Team Penske are direct competitors with NASCAR and the plaintiff teams for sponsorships, employees, and on-track performance. Consequently, the disclosure of their proprietary financial and business information would be "incredibly burdensome and harmful." Moreover, the filing expresses a lack of confidence that a protective order would effectively maintain the confidentiality of such sensitive data, given the existing First Amendment and common law rights of access already recognized by the court.
The legal representatives conclude by reiterating that there is no compelling need in the case for the confidential financial and business information of Hendrick Motorsports and Team Penske. They argue that any questions from the plaintiffs concerning even the anonymized average per-car data would inevitably necessitate the disclosure of additional information, potentially enabling parties, media, or the public to identify which figures are associated with which team. This, they maintain, would be inconsistent with the court’s prior order safeguarding the rights of Hendrick Motorsports, Team Penske, and other non-party teams. The court’s decision on this motion will be closely watched as it could significantly shape the trajectory of the antitrust litigation.
💬 Tinggalkan Komentar dengan Facebook
Author Profile
Latest entries
Nascar CupNovember 22, 2025Motorsport Titans Penske and Hendrick Challenge Court-Ordered Deposition Scope in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
Nascar CupNovember 21, 2025Chevrolet Electrifies NASCAR Cup Series with Aggressively Redesigned Camaro ZL1 Body for 2026 Season
Nascar CupNovember 21, 2025Teams Seek to Bar Hendrick Testimony as NASCAR Trial Deposition Dispute Escalates
Nascar CupNovember 21, 2025NASCAR Cup Series 2025: Unpacking the Internal Team Dominance
Ali Akbar Rosady
arthur roy sitompul
Anshari Taslim
Jonas Leo