Judge Sets May 7 Hearing on Live Nation Remedies Fight After Monopoly Verdict

The court approved the next post‑trial briefing schedule but will separately hear arguments over how the DOJ settlement review and the states’ broader remedies push should proceed.

A federal judge has scheduled a May 7 conference in the Live Nation‑Ticketmaster antitrust case, setting up the next major procedural fight after a jury found the companies illegally maintained monopoly power: whether the states that prevailed at trial can move quickly toward remedies, or whether Live Nation can delay that phase while its narrower settlement with the Department of Justice is reviewed.

In an order entered Monday (embedded below), U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian approved the parties’ proposed briefing schedule for Live Nation’s Rule 50(b) post‑trial motions. The judge also granted the plaintiffs up to 1,000 additional words in their opposition brief to address unresolved issues related to damages expert Dr. Rosa Abrantes‑Metz, while allowing defendants an extra 500 words on reply.

The more consequential aspect of the order, however, is a hearing Subramanian set for May 7 at 11 a.m. in Manhattan. According to the court, the conference will focus on “the schedule with respect to the Tunney Act and remedies proceedings,” elevating a dispute that now sits between the monopoly verdict and any potential court‑ordered relief.

Previous Coverage: State AGs Now Explicitly Seek Live Nation Breakup After Monopoly Verdict

Subramanian also directed the states and defendants to have someone involved in prior settlement negotiations attend the conference, so the court can assess whether discussions remain ongoing and whether there is “a further way that the Court can be of assistance,” without requiring disclosure of specific settlement terms.

That instruction gives the May 7 hearing additional weight. Subramanian is not merely setting dates; he is positioning the conference as a checkpoint to determine whether any viable settlement path remains between Live Nation and the non‑settling states, while preparing to chart the next steps if it does not.

The dispute over scheduling is significant because the parties sharply disagree about what should happen next.

The Justice Department wants its settlement with Live Nation and Ticketmaster to advance on its own track under the Tunney Act, the statutory framework governing judicial review of antitrust consent decrees. In a March 27 letter, DOJ and the settling parties said they expect to file an explanation of procedures, stipulation and order, and proposed final judgment, followed by a competitive impact statement and a public comment period of at least 60 days. DOJ later told the court it anticipates seeking entry of final judgment in early or mid‑September.

The non‑settling states argue their remedies process should move forward in parallel with the Tunney Act review. They have asked for fact discovery related to remedies to occur during the public‑comment period and want the court to reserve its public‑interest determination on the DOJ settlement until after holding a hearing on the states’ proposed relief. According to the states, handling the tracks together would reduce duplication and help ensure that any remedies imposed do not conflict.

Live Nation has urged the court to take the opposite approach. The company wants all remedies proceedings paused until its post‑trial motions are resolved and the DOJ settlement is approved, contending that the DOJ’s final judgment should define the baseline before the court considers whether the states are entitled to additional relief.

That is precisely the outcome the states say they are trying to avoid.

In an April 24 joint letter, the states warned that Live Nation’s proposed schedule would “needlessly delay” remedies litigation and push consideration of state relief “for nearly a year after the Tunney Act proceeding concludes.” They also argued that their entitlement to remedies does not depend on what DOJ or other states negotiated in settlement, and that postponing remedies discovery risks duplicative proceedings later.

Previous Coverage: Live Nation Tries to Put Breakup Fight Behind DOJ Settlement as States Push Back

That procedural clash is likely to dominate the May 7 hearing. The judge will not be deciding at that conference whether Live Nation and Ticketmaster must be broken up. But he may determine the path that governs how quickly — or slowly — that fight unfolds, and whether the DOJ settlement is considered before, alongside, or effectively ahead of the states’ broader remedies demands.

The order also keeps Live Nation’s post‑verdict challenge to the jury’s findings on a defined track. Under the agreed schedule, defendants’ opening post‑trial briefs are due May 21, the states’ opposition briefs are due June 18, and defendants’ replies are due July 2, with any hearing on those motions to occur after July 9.

Those filings are expected to include Live Nation’s renewed bid for judgment as a matter of law, along with continued attacks on the damages theory that produced the jury’s finding of a $1.72 per‑ticket overcharge. The expanded word limits signal that expert testimony from Abrantes‑Metz will remain a central post‑trial battleground.

For now, Subramanian has effectively divided the case into two lanes. Written briefing aimed at overturning or narrowing the verdict will proceed on a fixed timetable. The broader dispute over the DOJ settlement, the Tunney Act review, and the states’ push for additional remedies will be aired in open court next week.

For Live Nation, the May 7 hearing offers an opportunity to argue that the DOJ settlement should come first and frame any subsequent state relief. For the states, it is a chance to press the view that the company should not be allowed to use the federal settlement as a delaying tactic after losing at trial.

And for the court, it marks the first major decision point since the verdict on whether the case moves promptly into a remedies fight — or whether Live Nation obtains the slower, sequential process it has been seeking.

Order: May 7 Hearing