Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In an action against NASCAR and an affiliated company that owns multiple racetracks, alleging violation of federal antitrust laws by not sanctioning a Sprint Cup race at plaintiff's racetrack and preventing them from purchasing other racetracks that already host such a race, summary judgment in favor of defendants is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding two experts' reports and deposition testimonies as being unreliable under Daubert; 2) without expert testimony, plaintiff lacks the ability to define the relevant markets necessary to succeed on its claims; and 3) plaintiff cannot demonstrate that NASCAR and the affiliate are legally capable of conspiring with each other or that its failure to obtain a Sprint Cup race constitutes an antitrust injury.
Argued: July 30, 2009
Decided and Filed: December 11, 2009
Opinion by Circuit Judge Gilman
For Appellant: Charles Frederick Rule, Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
For Appellee: David Boies, Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP