NASCAR has submitted a new legal motion, seeking court-supervised negotiations in the 23XI Racing legal battle, as tensions rise between the racing organization and both 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports. The dispute is playing out in the Western District of North Carolina, where NASCAR is pushing for settlement discussions led by a judge rather than private mediation, in hopes of reaching a resolution that addresses concerns from stakeholders across the sport.
NASCAR Seeks Court-Supervised Settlement Talks
The motorsport giant filed a motion requesting that Judge Kenneth D. Bell authorize a judicial settlement conference, but specifying that another judge oversee the talks rather than Bell himself. NASCAR’s move comes after previous mediation sessions, overseen by Jeffrey Mishkin, a seasoned mediator and former NBA Chief Legal Officer, ended without agreement.
NASCAR’s legal filing states their belief that guidance from a judge
“would benefit from a facilitated settlement discussion with a distinguished member of the bench who could provide unique insight into a jury trial in a complex matter such as this one in front of a jury in this District.”
This approach, they argue, could offer unique advantages compared to the earlier rounds of private mediation efforts.
“Recognizing the value of a judicial settlement conference, this Court has previously indicated a willingness to offer a judicial settlement conference at a similar stage in the proceedings: after efforts with a private mediator and following the close of discovery and filing of summary judgment motions.”
– Counsel, in legal filing
The motion also points to recent declarations from nonparty race teams, who have expressed that the wider NASCAR garage supports settling the dispute rather than risking the Charter system’s value at a public trial. NASCAR argues that momentum is building among all involved parties, as well as within the broader motorsport community, to settle the matter out of court.
“A judicial settlement conference, unlike a mediation or settlement conference, provides an opportunity for the parties and counsel to engage in settlement discussions with a judicial officer experienced in the legal issues and the issues common to a jury trial in the Western District of North Carolina.”
– Counsel, in legal filing
23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports Push Back
Within hours, 23XI Racing and Front Row Motorsports responded by rejecting NASCAR’s proposed shift to a judicial conference, instead expressing their preference to continue mediation with Jeffrey Mishkin. They emphasized Mishkin’s expertise resolving antitrust disputes in major international sports contexts and cited his extensive background in high-profile sports arbitration and mediation.
“He has significant expertise in complex, sports-related antitrust disputes and has served as an arbitrator or mediator for the international Court of Arbitration for Sport, the America’s Cup, FIFA, and the NFL, among others.”
– 23XI and FRM court filing
The teams argued that discarding Mishkin as mediator would harm, rather than help, the chances of settling the dispute, labeling NASCAR’s motion as an attempt to sway public perception rather than a genuine step toward resolution.
Broader Implications for NASCAR Teams and Series
This legal conflict has drawn the attention of both the garage area and high-profile figures, including Denny Hamlin of 23XI Racing, and could determine how future disputes over the value of team charters, antitrust issues, and operational fairness are handled by the sport’s governing bodies. With pressure mounting from various stakeholders, the Western District of North Carolina now faces a critical juncture in deciding whether to allow further mediation or bring negotiations back under the court’s direction.
The result of this 23XI Racing legal battle will not only impact the named parties, but also set crucial precedents for how NASCAR, its teams, and mediators such as Jeffrey Mishkin or future arbitrators approach complex disputes. The next decision from the court could define how future conflicts are managed, and whether court-facilitated talks can break the current deadlock between the competing sides.
