A Los Angeles Superior Court choose on Wednesday denied a request from the Rose Bowl Operating Co. and the City of Pasadena seeking a temporary restraining order of their try and maintain UCLA soccer video games on the Rose Bowl, saying these entities had not demonstrated an emergency that might necessitate such an motion.
But choose James C. Chalfant urged the plaintiffs’ attorneys search discovery info relating to the varsity’s discussions with SoFi Stadium and file a movement for a preliminary injunction.
Nima Mohebbi, an lawyer representing the Rose Bowl Operating Co. and the City of Pasadena, mentioned he had filed a public information request in an try to assemble details about these discussions and was happy with the choose’s statements.
“Even though he found that there was no immediate emergency,” Mohebbi mentioned, “he made very clear in a lot of his statements that there’s irreparable harm, that UCLA has an obligation to play at the Rose Bowl through 2044 and we’re very confident in our facts of this case. So I think all in, we feel very, very good.”
Maurice Suh, an lawyer representing UCLA, declined to remark.
When a UCLA lawyer contended through the roughly 80-minute courtroom session that the varsity’s relationship with the Rose Bowl was breaking down, Chalfant mentioned, “I don’t know why UCLA can’t just show up and play football at the Rose Bowl. You don’t need to talk to them at all.”
Chalfant mentioned he didn’t agree with the UCLA attorneys’ competition that the Rose Bowl lease amounted to a private companies contract for which particular efficiency — basically an order compelling the Bruins to stay tenants — was not out there. The choose mentioned particular efficiency may very well be out there in a scenario involving an precise breach or an anticipatory breach of the contract.
UCLA, which has performed its house soccer video games on the Rose Bowl since 1982, has publicly said that it’s evaluating its choices for a future soccer house. Attorneys representing UCLA shook their heads when the choose requested them in the event that they meant to terminate the settlement.
Rose Bowl officers have filed litigation intended to compel the Bruins to honor a lease that runs by the 2043 season, saying that financial damages wouldn’t be sufficient to offset the lack of their anchor tenant.