Recently, as we disclosed earlier on eWn, WWE embarked on legal measures against the Attorney General of Texas in a bid to suppress the release of their so-called “proprietary information” concerning the 2023 Royal Rumble pay-per-view event’s bidding process.
WWE resorted to these legal measures in reaction to an information request by Wrestlenomics from the city of San Antonio, seeking to investigate ticket sales and information provided by the city to host the event. WWE maintained that this information comprises “trade secrets” and should thus reciprocate an exemption from disclosure.
As the legal fight persists, WWE submitted a default judgment on the 9th of April, as revealed by Wrestlenomics. A hearing has been arranged for May 29, commencing at 9:00 AM local time. WWE’s representation in court will be Tricia R. DeLeon, an attorney from Holland & Knight LLP, under the adjudication of Judge Jan Soifer.
Undeterred in their pursuit, Wrestlenomics has made another submission, this time directed to the Office of the Governor of Texas. The submission mirrors the earlier one, seeking similar information related to both the 2023 Royal Rumble and WrestleMania 38 in Dallas/Arlington.
Specifically, the recent request for the latter event aims to ascertain the amount the government compensated WWE to stage it, which is roughly estimated to be a whopping million.
In return, the Governor’s Office has called on the Texas Attorney General to validate an exemption termed as Deliberative Process Privilege to bar the unveiling of this information. This exemption is being requested due to “inter- or intra-agency communication”, coupled with the presence of “information that is intimate and embarrassing and not of legitimate concern to the public, including financial decisions that do not relate to transactions between an individual and a governmental body.”
For the Royal Rumble request, the Governor’s Office is seeking two exemptions: Deliberative Process Privilege and Common Law Privacy.
The office contends that the information requested entails “intimate and embarrassing” details that don’t bear legitimate public concern. The exemption necessitates that the release of this information would be “highly objectionable to a reasonable person” and “not of legitimate public concern.”