Why 23XI and FRM lost their preliminary hearing

After four days of deliberation, Judge Frank D. Whitney ruled on the motion for preliminary injunction filed by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports. The request was rejected.

“At this time, the plaintiffs have not met their burdens as required for a preliminary injunction. Should circumstances change, the plaintiffs may file a renewed request for a preliminary injunction. Therefore, the court dismisses the plaintiffs’ claim without prejudice “, reads the judge’s decision. .

The injunction was filed by 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports on October 9and asks the court to intervene in two ways; by granting both teams (23XI/FRM) two charters under the terms of the 2025 Charter Agreement, and by prohibiting NASCAR from implementing a clause waiving the antitrust rights of the teams that sign.

On Monday, Nov. 4 both parties had the opportunity to argue their case in court.

This is evident from court documents, which have been reviewed and studied by Racing America OnSIIn order for a preliminary injunction to be granted, the following four things must be true: ‘(1) a likelihood of success on the merits; (2) a strong prospect of irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted; (3) the balance of stocks favors the move; (4) an order is in the interest of the public.”

In arguing their case before the judge, 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports made several arguments to demonstrate the irreparable harm that would be caused to them if the court did not issue a preliminary injunction.

23XI Racing, co-owned by Denny Hamlin, NBA superstar Michael Jordan and Curtis Polk, claims the team not only risks losing sponsorship deals but also drivers if they are not allowed to compete as Chartered Entries. Tyler Reddick’s contract that allows him to leave if there is no charter agreement for his joining.

The teams also claim that not having the financial benefit and revenue stream that comes from being a Chartered Entry into the NASCAR Cup Series could jeopardize their continued existence and force them both to cease operations to put.

As the judge explains: “Although plaintiffs have alleged that they will face the risk of irreparable harm, they have not sufficiently alleged present, immediate, urgent, irreparable harm, but rather only speculative, possible harm. That is, even though plaintiffs claim they are on the brink of irreparable damage, the 2025 racing season is still months away – the stock cars remain in the garage.”

In his ruling, the judge states that the plaintiffs (teams) have raised arguments that are “too speculative to give rise to a preliminary injunction”, mentioning only the possibility of losing their drivers and sponsorship agreements, rather than a current threat that they will. losing drivers and/or sponsors.

Additionally, 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports did not claim that their companies cannot survive without the preliminary injunction, but again speculated that their organizations may not be able to survive without the preliminary injunction.

When it comes to the request for an interim injunction, speculation about the potential negative consequences this may have for the party involved is not sufficient, and there must be a concrete element that the team would suffer irreparable harm.

The filing reads: “At this stage, teams are no closer to irreparable damage than they were to the ‘Drivers, start your engines’ order during the first race of the 2025 season.”

In a statement released Friday, 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports, along with their lead attorney Jeffrey Kessler, said they plan to appeal Judge Frank D. Whitney’s decision. When this appeal occurs, they will have to prove that the harm is irreparable and poses an imminent threat, not just a possibility.