Why NHRA is
not likely to settle the PSTA lawsuit
IN RE: PSTA VS
now you've probably all heard the rumor that
the National Hot Rod Association is going to
settle the rag-tag, three-year-old Arizona civil
lawsuit against them by giving up some of their
most prized possessions: Indianapolis Raceway
Park and millions of dollars. That would be
as foolish as if Jay Leno quit The Tonight Show
tomorrow instead of in five years. Based upon
available Maricopa County Arizona Court documents,
one of Agent 1320's operatives with some legal
background submitted the following brief. The
operative's notes are in brackets.
18 REASONS NHRA IS NOT LIKELY TO SETTLE THE
CASE IN PRO STOCK TRUCK ASSOCIATION- VS. –NHRA
1. Thirty-two named plaintiffs filed the Civil
Complaint Oct. 19, 2001 against one lonely defendant,
NHRA. [Pile it on!]
2. Six additional attorneys from out of state
were recognized by the jurisdiction in Arizona
to appear on behalf of NHRA. In short order,
they file a Motion to Dismiss. [Not exactly
3. The Plaintiffs (PSTA) fail to state a cla
im upon which relief can be granted by the courts.
[In other words, THEY DON'T WANT ANY MONEY.
That's curious since civil court is usually
about collecting "damages."]
4. By filing the lawsuit in Arizona, perhaps
the Plaintiffs hoped it would be too inconvenient
for the California-based NHRA to defend itself.
NHRA cited Forum Non Conveniens as a reason
to dismiss the case to highlight that point,
but NHRA could have used that same issue as
a basis for a Change of Venue to California
Courts. Since no such motion has been filed
to date, it can be inferred that a Maricopa
County, Arizona jury pool is just as favorable
to NHRA. [Get ready to rumble.]
5. The Plaintiffs (PSTA) request punitive damages.
[How do they plan to punish the NHRA without
making them pay money? Force Tom Compton to
wear a sandwich board in downtown Phoenix that
says "Sorry we F'ed the Trucks"?]
6. February 26, 2002: the parties agree to
file documents under seal and for protective
orders after a motion from NHRA. [What kind
of smear-job were the Plaintiffs trying to do
through their pleadings?]
7. February 27, 2002: Plaintiff RW Performance
Inc. asks to be dropped from the lawsuit. [This
is when the Plaintiffs begin to start dropping
8. May 8, 2002: Jim Kennedy, Jim Kennedy Motorsports,
Inc., J Scott Enterprises are substituted in
name under Pro Stock Truck Association and no
longer listed as individual Plaintiffs.
9. May 21, 2002: The Court addresses the NHRA's
Motion to Dismiss and Motion for More Definite
Statement as follows: The Court cannot conclude
"beyond doubt" that Plaintiffs (PSTA)
will be unable to prove any set of facts in
support of their claims. Defendant (NHRA) is
obviously free to file dispositive motions in
the future if, after disclosures and discovery,
Plaintiffs appear unable to support some or
all of their claims with competent evidence.
[Translation: Plaintiffs have produced no evidence
to support their claims. NHRA, wait and see
if they come up with something before the deadline,
before asking for another dismissal. There's
lots of time!]
10. July 8, 2002: The court grants part of
the NHRA motion to request that the Plaintiffs
(PSTA) make a more definite statement about
what they want from the NHRA. If not money,
11. December 20, 2002: Plaintiff Price Racing
dba DBP Enterprises Inc. asks to be dropped
from the lawsuit.
12. March 6, 2003: Plaintiffs amend the Complaint
to drop most of the individually named Plaintiffs.
The world does not need to know how many are
dropping out, okay?
13. March 11, 2003: Plaintiffs Lester McGaha
and Lester McGaha Enterprises ask to be dropped
from the lawsuit. Still, some Plaintiffs choose
to make a statement.
14. April 28, 2003: Plaintiff Race Car Technologies
asks to be dropped from the lawsuit.
15. October 23, 2003: Plaintiffs Joe Pigford,
Full Boar Motorsports, Robert Yonke, Robert
Yonke Motorsports ask to be dropped from the
16. November 18, 2003: The Official Court Reporters
transcripts are put under seal. [Sensitive stuff,
17. December 8, 2003: NHRA claims that Pro
Stock Truck Association does not have the capacity
to sue. [Who is left behind PSTA to ride what
once was a fireball - now a matchstick - against
18. The trial is set for January 10, 2006.
[Will the match even be lit by then?]
you think? Send your email to email@example.com.