Judge approves settlement in St. Louis Rams PSL lawsuit

Getty Images

The Rams left St. Louis for Los Angeles a few years ago, but remained involved in litigation with personal seat license holders from their former home until late last year.

PSL holders were seeking money back for the nine remaining years on the Rams’ lease in St. Louis and a settlement reached by the two sides last November set them up to get a refund on the money originally laid out. The lease was for 30 years, so the PSL holders will get 30 percent of the initial price refunded to them. On Monday, U.S. District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh Jr. approved the settlement.

Limbaugh said the suit was “resolved in a satisfactory way” and the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that refunds could total $24 million. PSL holders have until August 23 to file for refunds and about 9,900 refund requests have already been made.

The settlement also calls for the Rams to pay the attorney fees for the PSL owners outside of the overall settlement amount. Daniel Kaplan of TheAthletic.com reports they will pay out $7.2 million to cover those costs.

11 responses to “Judge approves settlement in St. Louis Rams PSL lawsuit

  1. That’s a joke. If there is no team for which to buy game tickets, 100 percent of the cost of the PSLs should be refunded. Sounds like a bought-and-paid judge.

  2. Wow, so the Rams get to keep ~70% of the PSL revenue for games that never happened? How on earth is that allowable? The fact that they have to pay the lawyers fees of $7m is laughable when they’re keeping what, ~$70m of those fees? And folks wonder why the common man hates the NFL and it’s greed.

  3. The PSL’s bought in St. Louis covered 30 years of games. A 30% refund would basically equal the 9 years left. So this is actually a fair outcome for both sides.

  4. The whole amount (if not more, Rams broke a contract with the PSL holders after all) should have been refunded. I would be pissed.

  5. joshr99164 says:
    June 24, 2019 at 4:47 pm
    The PSL’s bought in St. Louis covered 30 years of games. A 30% refund would basically equal the 9 years left. So this is actually a fair outcome for both sides.


    It depends on how they managed this. If you bought a PSL early on you’re square no matter what, but what if you bought a PSL for 15 years 6 years before they moved. Do you only get 1/3 of that 15 years back or do you get the full amount left remaining? That’s the big question in answering whether this is fair or not.

  6. “Wow, so the Rams get to keep ~70% of the PSL revenue for games that never happened?”

    Not at all. The PSLs were for 30 years of games. They had already played 21 years of games or 70% of the games the PSLs were for when they moved to LA.

    Thus the 30% refund for the 30% of the games that will now never happen.

  7. It sounds like they got the full amount remaining. The fact that they had to sue for this is ridiculous. If anything the rights should have transferred to the LA rams mew stadium where they would be worth a whole lot more

  8. As much as I dislike Kroenke, the city of ST. Louis signed a bad deal, and the people who bought PSLs should have read the PSL documentation more thoroughly.

    If I can pick up and leave on such and such date then you better consider that that is a real possibility.

  9. Good, Kroenke (aka Silent Stan or Squirrel Head) finally has to pay something. Not like it
    will even matter to him, but its a win for all those is St Louis he lied to and screwed.
    What goes around comes around and Kroenke will get his in LA. Southern California cares too much for the Lakers and USC to ever really become a NFL top tier market. Welcome to the Smog Bowl.

  10. Sounds like a settlement made just to get the stupid lawsuit behind them even though it lacked merit, much like the Kaepernick settlement in that respect.

    Rams were dishonest with the fans and the city of St Louis and should be sued for fraud.

    If anyone was dishonest and should be sued, it’s the city of St. Louis. St. Louis only got the team there in the first place by promising a top tier stadium for 30 years at zero cost to the Rams or the Rams had permission to relocate. They then didn’t even try to keep that promise even after the Rams waived the “top tier” check in 2005.

    The Rams said they hoped it worked out, but never said they’d settle for anything less than the terms they were promised in the first place. Anyone in St. Louis cursing them now would have moved the team too. St. Louis simply isn’t a viable NFL market without a top tier stadium at zero cost to the team, which is why neither the Chargers or Raiders had any interest.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.