Chicago Cubs 2016 NL Central Championship Gear

judge gavel courtYou may recall proclamations earlier this month that, at long last, the various rooftop lawsuits against the Chicago Cubs regarding the ongoing renovations – specifically, the outfield signage that incidentally blocks views into the ballpark – were at an end. I even said it myself. (You can read that post there for any background on this stuff that you might be missing.)

While that’s still basically true, two of the rooftops most impacted by the outfield signage aren’t quite giving up. Although a federal court dismissed their claims with prejudice, they have requested that the court allow them to amend their complaint to address some of its deficiencies with respect to the antitrust claims (Tribune).

Without getting too legal on you – I am no longer a practicing attorney – the original suit was dismissed by the court in such a way as to make it difficult for the rooftops to simply “fix” the issues in their complaint. Often, when a lawsuit is dismissed at the complaint stage, a plaintiff can often address the issues that were raised by the defendant/court, and freely re-file an amended complaint.

There are limits, though, as courts don’t want to encourage plaintiffs to file incomplete complaints, litigate for a while via various motions (as happened here), hone their complaint further, and then re-file an amended complaint, which has been strengthened by the work of the defense. Here, for a variety of reasons, the rooftops’ suit was dismissed “with prejudice” – i.e., the rooftops cannot simply fix the issues and re-file a new complaint without permission from the court.

And that’s what the rooftops are seeking to get from the court, which you can see in the filing if you’d like to peruse. You can also read more on the filing and the lawsuit at the Tribune. Given that their business might be on the line, I can’t fault these rooftops for fighting via every possible avenue they have.

It’s a tough legal hurdle for the rooftops to clear, though, so, for now, I wouldn’t be too concerned about this case being re-opened beyond now having to litigate whether the rooftops should have to right to amend their complaint. But it is one more legal headache for the Cubs to deal with.

Keep Reading BN ...

« | »