Tournament Seeking Continuance on Legal Fees Hearing

The Tournament of Roses Association has asked a federal judge to continue a hearing involving the city of Pasadena regarding legal fees related to their ongoing feud over ownership of the Rose Bowl Game from Sept. 3 to Sept. 24.

In July, a U.S. district judge granted six motions filed by the city and dismissed associated Tournament of Roses claims related to trademark infringement, unfair competition, false association, false endorsement, and false designation of origin, and false advertising. The judge did not rule on one count, saying it was hypothetical.

The city is seeking more than $400,000 in legal fees. 

The Master License Agreement, which governs the relationship between the two parties, states that the loser of court action is responsible for paying legal fees.

But the Tournament later claimed the lawsuit “achieves key purposes” and that it is not obligated to pay legal fees.

Now in court documents, the Tournament explicitly states that the court sided with the city. 

“On July 12, 2021, this Court granted the City’s Motion to Dismiss and dismissed each of the Tournament’s causes of action with prejudice,” according to a court document filed by the Tournament. “The City then filed its Motion for an Award of Attorneys’ Fees on July 26, 2021.”

The two sides were scheduled for a hearing last Friday, but the court continued that hearing to Sept. 3, which the Tournament claims its counsel cannot attend due to “prior, non-movable engagements.”

The city has refused to stipulate to continue to a future hearing date. 

The city and the Tournament have been feuding since restrictions arising from the pandemic caused the cancellation of the annual Rose Parade and barred fans from attending the Rose Bowl Game in Pasadena. The game was ultimately moved to Arlington, Texas, marking the first time since World War II that the Rose Bowl game was played outside of Pasadena.

At that time, the two sides disagreed over the ownership of the game, which led to the lawsuit. 

Last month, U.S. District Judge Andre John Birotte sided with the city in dismissing all but one of the counts filed by the Tournament in its February lawsuit for alleged trademark infringement, unfair competition, false association, slander, and false advertising.

With regard to that one count — focused on the document’s so-called force majeure clause, or unforeseeable circumstances that prevent someone from fulfilling a contract — the court declined to rule.

“C. Mitchell Hendy, counsel for the Tournament, conferred with Kent Raygor, counsel for the City, on August 25 and 26, 2021 to discuss filing a stipulation requesting a continuance of the hearing date until September 17, 2021 — the next available hearing date — but Mr. Raygor is similarly unavailable on that date due to a previously planned out-of-country vacation,” according to the court document. 

“Mr.  Raygor stated that the City refused to stipulate to continue this hearing until any  future date, so the Tournament now seeks this Court’s Order ex parte to continue the hearing to September 24, 2021.”