Having dedicated to taking part in at the Rose Bowl next season, UCLA’s long-term soccer destiny stays in the palms of a courtroom.
Attorneys representing the college are interesting an LA Superior Court decide’s choice to deny arbitration in the Rose Bowl’s breach-of-contract case against UCLA. Those same attorneys have also filed a movement to pause the case, pending the attraction choice.
But discovery has began in the case after a decide denied UCLA’s earlier try to stop depositions, and it’s potential the attraction may not considerably delay the begin of jury choice in the trial.
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA – NOVEMBER 22: A common view of a kickoff between the UCLA Bruins and the Washington Huskies at Rose Bowl Stadium on November 22, 2025 in Pasadena, California. (Photo by Luke Hales/Getty Images)
Washington v UCLA Getty Images
Central to the attraction is the parsing of the dispute decision clause in a contract that runs through June 2044 and does not embrace an opt-out provision. Judge Joseph Lipner not too long ago dominated that the dispute decision clause did not entitle UCLA to determine the matter through arbitration, which would have restricted discovery and expedited a decision out of courtroom.
The Rose Bowl and the City of Pasadena are attempting to pressure the Bruins to stay as tenants through the finish of their lease, claiming that their departure would cause “irreparable harm” for which no quantity of cash could adequately compensate them if the Bruins left for SoFi Stadium.
UCLA’s plans are more and more unsure after the college dedicated to remaining at its longtime home stadium for next season. The transfer came not lengthy after the dismissal of UCLA vice chancellor and chief monetary officer Stephen Agostini, one of the main proponents of a transfer to SoFi Stadium.
It’s believed that the proposed transfer might have been more about funds than soccer. As half of its relocation, UCLA would profit from a share of a mixed-use improvement venture close to SoFi Stadium. The Bruins would also presumably get suite income and a larger slice of parking earnings than they obtain at the Rose Bowl.
It’s always potential that UCLA and the Rose Bowl could strive to renegotiate their lease in a means that would fulfill both sides, ending the lawsuit.
UCLA will get pleasure from one new supply of earnings at the Rose Bowl next season, protecting cash from the sale of premium seats related with a new $30 million field-level club in the south finish zone. Deposits for these seats are expected to go on sale quickly.
The Rose Bowl has also sued SoFi Stadium and Kroenke Sports and Entertainment, accusing them of tortious interference by attempting to lure away UCLA.
Source hyperlink
