Kapp v. National Football League

Joe Kapp (plaintiff) contracted to play for the New England Patriots (club) of the National Football League (league) (defendant) for the 1970–1972 seasons. The club asked Kapp to sign the league’s standard player contract, which the league’s governing documents required that all players sign. Kapp refused to do so, which ultimately led the club to discharge him. Kapp sued the league, its member teams, and Pete Rozelle, the league’s commissioner (collectively, NFL) (defendants), alleging, among other things, that at least the following league rules (challenged rules) violated the Sherman Antitrust Act: (1) the ransom or Rozelle rule, which prohibited a player whose contract had expired from joining another league team without the prior team’s consent, effectively requiring the new team to compensate the prior team; (2) the draft rule, which prohibited a player who had been selected by a team at the start of his league career from joining another league team, even if the player never signed a contract with the selecting team; (3) the one-man rule, pursuant to which Rozelle had sole and not-appealable decision-making authority with respect to certain issues; and (4) the tampering rule, which prohibited teams from negotiating with or acquiring a player whose league rights were held by another league team. Kapp further alleged that he had been adversely affected by each of these rules. Kapp moved for summary judgment, arguing that the challenged rules constituted per se violations of the act or at least were clearly illegal even under a rule-of-reason analysis. The NFL responded that, among other things, sports leagues were unique and required special leeway under antitrust law to limit competition for players so as to encourage fairly matched contests. Thus, per the NFL, the challenged rules did not constitute per se violations of the act and survived rule-of-reason analysis.