City of Anaheim V. Angels Baseball LP - Lawsuit

Lawsuit

Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle and other city officials asserted that the name change violated the spirit of the lease clause, even if it was in technical compliance. They argued that a name change was a major bargaining chip in negotiations between the city and Disney, and that the wording of the clause was merely to allow Disney some "wiggle room" in selecting the team name (Disney chairman Michael Eisner reportedly considered naming the team the Mighty Angels of Anaheim). They further argued that the city would never have agreed to the new lease without the name change, because the new lease required that the city partially fund the stadium's renovation while reducing annual revenue for the city. Anaheim sued Angels Baseball L.P. in Orange County Superior Court, seeking monetary damages and a restoration of the Anaheim Angels name. Concurrently, city politicians boycotted the city's luxury suite at Angel Stadium, including during the Angels' 2005 playoff run, opting instead to donate game tickets in the suite to various charities. A trial, initially set for November 7, 2005 was postponed until January 9, 2006.

In addition to the lawsuit brought by the city of Anaheim, the mayors of every Orange County city, as well as the mayor of Los Angeles, signed a petition opposing the name change, while the city councils of Anaheim, Irvine, and Los Angeles adopted formal resolutions opposing the name change. The Los Angeles resolution specifically stated that the city only recognizes professional sports teams bearing the name "Los Angeles" as those whose home facilities are within the Los Angeles city limits, including the National League's Dodgers, the NBA's Lakers and Clippers, the WNBA's Sparks, the NHL's Kings, and the Arena Football League's Avengers. Disney and the city of Los Angeles filed amicus curiae papers in Orange County Superior Court supporting Anaheim's position in its lawsuit against the team.

The city also sought a preliminary injunction to immediately reverse the name change in advance of the trial, which was rejected by the superior court judge. The city appealed the judge's ruling to the Court of Appeal, Fourth District, which granted an unusual writ moving the city's case to the top of the docket and held a hearing on March 28, 2005. Though a ruling had been anticipated by April 7, 2005 the three judges of the appellate court merely urged the city and the team to work towards a settlement prior to trial. The appellate court ruled against Anaheim's request for an injunction on June 27, 2005.

The case proceeded to jury trial on January 9, 2006, and on February 9, 2006, the jury found in favor of the team, determining that the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim name was in compliance with the lease, and thus denying the city any monetary compensation. Both citing the jury verdict finding the team in compliance and noting that his own conclusion agreed with that judgment, on March 2, 2006, the judge in the case formally denied the city's request to force the team to restore the Anaheim Angels name.