Title: MLB Players Union Slaps Down DraftKings' Interlocutory Appeal in NIL Lawsuit
Union Urges Judge to Reject DraftKings NIL Appeal in Legal Dispute
Posted on: April 18, 2025, 07:31h.Last updated on: April 18, 2025, 07:31h.
Author: @etfgodfather | Financial, Legal, Gaming | MLB, Players Association, DraftKings
Swing and a miss for DraftKings as the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) pushes back, asking a federal judge to reject the gaming giant's bid for an appeal in their dispute over the misuse of MLB players' names, image, and likeness (NIL).
Citing an "everything but the kitchen sink approach," the MLBPA filed a motion with the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Thursday, opposing DraftKings' appeal effort. The labor group argues the gaming company hasn't provided sufficient grounds to qualify for the extraordinary treatment of an interlocutory appeal.
Last month, the court denied DraftKings' motion to dismiss the original suit, which was filed in September 2024. Judge Karen Martson ruled that while some of the company's use of players' likenesses bore resemblance to media appearances, she couldn't make a universal ruling that applied across the board.
The MLBPA points out that even if the Third Circuit Court of Appeals were to side with DraftKings on the comparability of using players' images to media, it wouldn't be enough to dismiss the case, as the union's other claims would remain valid.
Interlocutory appeals are rare, even with the burden of proof being formidable. These appeals can be filed to resolve key legal questions that could potentially end or narrow the litigation early. However, DraftKings is yet to demonstrate it meets the necessary standards for such an appeal.
"In short, DraftKings has not shown, and cannot show, that an interlocutory appeal would 'materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation,' nor that the order denying its motion to dismiss involves a 'controlling question of law' on which there is 'substantial ground' for disagreement," says the union's legal counsel.
The union reiterates that the case should move promptly toward trial. While the exact financial damages haven’t been specified, historical settlemends with other labor groups representing professional athletes have set precedents.
This legal showdown is part of a broader NIL dispute involving several sportsbook operators. However, the MLBPA has dismissed or settled suits against Bet365, FanDuel, and Underdog, leaving DraftKings as the sole defendant with unresolved litigation.
** sources:- [1] Cornell Law School- [1] Forbes- [1] Reuters
- The Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) is challenging DraftKings' interlocutory appeal in their ongoing NIL lawsuit, citing an "everything but the kitchen sink approach."
- The union argues that DraftKings has not provided sufficient grounds to qualify for an interlocutory appeal, which are rare and can only be filed to resolve key legal questions that could potentially end or narrow the litigation early.
- The union's legal counsel stated that DraftKings has not shown or could not show that an interlocutory appeal would "materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation," or that the order denying its motion to dismiss involves a "controlling question of law" on which there is "substantial ground" for disagreement.
- The union insists that the case should move promptly toward trial, as historical settlements with other labor groups representing professional athletes have set precedents for potential financial damages.
- This legal dispute is part of a broader NIL dispute involving several sportsbook operators, but the MLBPA has dismissed or settled suits against Bet365, FanDuel, and Underdog, leaving DraftKings as the sole defendant with unresolved litigation in the sports betting, finance, and business realm of sports and baseball, particularly MLB.
