Federal appeals court dismisses Kentucky suit

LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- A federal appeals court on Friday rejected claims by Kentucky Speedway that NASCAR and International Speedway Corp. violated federal antitrust laws by keeping it off the premier racing circuit.

The decision by a three-judge panel from the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ends, for now, Kentucky Speedway's legal efforts to force NASCAR to bring a Sprint Cup race to the track in Sparta, in northern Kentucky. The panel said Kentucky Speedway failed to prove NASCAR and International Speedway Corp., worked together with other tracks to keep the Kentucky track from getting a Sprint Cup race.

• Tickets for 2010 on sale now

"We are extremely pleased with [Friday's] decision by the appeals court," ISC chief executive officer Lesa France Kennedy said. "This ruling again reaffirms the validity of a business model that has significantly benefited the sport's fans, business partners and other industry constituents for more than 50 years.

"Further, this confirms NASCAR, much like other sport properties such as the NFL, MLB and the NBA, has the right to host its events when and where it decides is best for the sport and its fans."

Kentucky Speedway spokesman Tim Bray declined comment.

Kentucky Speedway sued NASCAR in 2005 after being rejected multiple times for a top level race. The track, located about halfway between Louisville and Cincinnati, has drawn huge crowds to some of its other races. The Nationwide Series race last year drew more than 70,000 people to the 1.5-mile tri-oval in northern Kentucky.

"We question [Kentucky Speedway's] allegation that NASCAR's refusal to grant [Kentucky Speedway] a Sprint Cup race constitutes an antitrust injury because there are many considerations relevant to the quintessential business judgment of whether expanding the Sprint Cup to northern Kentucky makes economic sense in developing the NASCAR brand on a national basis," Judge Ronald Lee Gilman wrote for the court.

Judges Jerome Farris and Deborah Cook joined Gilman's opinion.

Kentucky Speedway alleged that NASCAR had conspired to leave the Sparta track and others out of the Sprint Cup Series despite their superior amenities. The speedway had asked that ISC be ordered to sell some of the tracks it owns that host Cup races and that the speedway be awarded more than $200 million in damages.

ISC-owned tracks host 55 percent of all Sprint Cup races. The rest are facilities owned by other companies, including Speedway Motorsports Inc., which purchased Kentucky Speedway in 2008 and is the only company besides ISC that owns multiple tracks on the Sprint Cup schedule.

Attorneys for NASCAR and ISC argued that the speedway had insufficient evidence to prove NASCAR and ISC worked together with other tracks to keep the Kentucky track from obtaining a race in the Sprint Cup Series. The appeals court found that Kentucky Speedway faced a challenge of showing NASCAR and ISC could legally conspire with one another given that the France family owns NASCAR and a 65 percent share of ISC.

"I'm not going to have any comment on when a Cup race can be there other than to say we're just very pleased," NASCAR chairman Brian France said. "It validates our business model and everything else. It's a big, big ruling."

Kentucky Speedway has taken several steps to lure a Sprint Cup race, including getting an interstate highway widened near the track and adding a new exit. The track, with a capacity of a little more than 66,000 fans, has said it's prepared to add 20,000 to 35,000 seats if it attracted a Sprint Cup race. Kentucky Speedway, which has drawn positive reviews from drivers and fans, is not included in the Sprint Cup schedule.

"However, we are happy to discuss alternatives with the track owners for 2011 and beyond as they relate to NASCAR's realignment plans," NASCAR spokesman Ramsey Poston said.

Kentucky Speedway founder Jerry Carroll said he personally feels that the case is over but needs to consult with the others in the former ownership group.

The founders of Kentucky Speedway have only two potential appeals left: They can ask for a hearing in front of all of the 24 appeals court judges, and they also can appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Both avenues are considered long shots.