A Palm Beach County (Fla.) circuit court judge last Friday dismissed a lawsuit accusing the PGA Tour of overcharging for tickets at five events held in 2023 and 2024.
Judge Luis Delgado granted the PGA Tour’s motion to dismiss claims brought by Larry Klayman, an attorney who asserts the PGA Tour overcharged his spectator admission tickets by 10% to 34% in violation of the Florida Antitrust Act and Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practice Act. The five events were the 2023 Honda Classic, the 2023 Arnold Palmer Invitational, the 2023 Players Championship, the 2023 Valspar Championship and the 2024 Genesis Open.
Delgado noted the 2024 Genesis Open is not applicable since the event happened in California, and Florida law governs only alleged injuries that occur in Florida. As to the four other PGA Tour events, Klayman’s tickets cost a total of $510. Based on the 10% to 34% figure, the combined overcharge was between $51 and $174.
The problem with potential damages rising to only $174, Delgado explained, is that applicable state law requires that damages exceed $30,000 in order for the court to recognize subject matter jurisdiction. Such jurisdiction refers to the power of a court to review a particular matter. The judge wrote that while Klayman’s case began as a putative class action, which at least in theory might have led to substantial damages, it is now brought only by Klayman and thus has a much smaller value.
The judge also rejected Klayman’s argument for subject matter jurisdiction based on his demand for equitable (injunctive) relief. Even with Klayman not meeting the $30,000 threshold, Delgado could have recognized jurisdiction if Klayman stated a cognizable claim.
He did not, the judge held.
Klayman demands an injunction to prevent the PGA Tour from (allegedly) continuing to violate Florida’s antitrust law and engaging in “unlawful conduct.” Delgado wrote the antitrust law demands “are legally deficient,” because they are “too vague to be enforceable.”
The judge also concluded he’s unable to act in a manner sought by Klayman. Klayman accuses the PGA Tour of conspiring with, among others, the DP World Tour, OWGR and the Golf Channel in unlawful acts. But Klayman is not, the judge explained, “entitled to an injunction against the Tour with respect to the conduct of others.” The judge added the court is “without jurisdiction” to issue an injunction against non-parties to the suit.
Delgado also wrote he can’t mandate so-called “competitive” pricing for tickets, concessions and other items purchased at PGA Tour events. In addition, the judge explained, he can’t enjoin the PGA Tour from fining or suspending golfers from playing in LIV Golf tournaments or the PGA Tour from working with OWGR in regard to point calculation methods.
In this matter the PGA Tour is represented by Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, with partners Anthony Dreyer, Karen Hoffman Lent and Matthew Martino playing key roles. Larry Silverman and Kyle Tanzer at Sidley Austin served as co-counsel to the PGA Tour.
Klayman has filed a notice of appeal. In a statement shared with the media, Klayman’s advocacy group, Freedom Watch, sharply criticized Delgado’s ruling. Freedom Watch says Delgado allowed “the case to be turned into a virtually secret star chamber, with little to no public access.” Freedom Watch also insists the case “was filed in the public interest, with the right of golf fans and the consuming public to know of the alleged monopolistic acts of the PGA Tour and its commissioner, in collusion with Tiger Woods” and others.
Klayman, according to the statement, plans to sue PGA Tour commissioner Jay Monahan and the PGA Tour over “their having fraudulently induced the dismissal” of his case.
Scott Soshnick contributed to this story.
(This story has been updated in the 10th paragraph with the Sidley Austin attorneys’ roles.)
