Blog« back to blog homeSubscribe to RSS feed
Month: September, 2026
Bryan Sullivan Speaks to The Mirror on Macklemore’s Potential Antitrust Claims Against Robert Kraft
Category: Press | Tuesday, September 22nd, 2026 | Comments Off on Bryan Sullivan Speaks to The Mirror on Macklemore’s Potential Antitrust Claims Against Robert Kraft
Bryan Sullivan was recently quoted in The Mirror discussing the potential legal options available to rapper Macklemore after he was allegedly barred from performing at Gillette Stadium following his appearance on Ed Sheeran’s Loop Tour.
Bryan explains that Robert Kraft could generally decide whether to host Macklemore at Gillette Stadium.
“If one venue owner independently decides not to host a performer, that is generally lawful,” Bryan tells The Mirror. “However, if competing stadium owners collectively agree to deny a performer access to a significant portion of the market, antitrust concerns become more substantial. The analysis would focus on whether there was coordinated action that restrained competition in the market for concert venues or live entertainment services.”
Furthermore, the article explores whether Macklemore could pursue a claim under Section 1 of the Sherman Act based on an alleged agreement among competing venue operators.
He shares that the claim could be based on the argument that “the alleged conduct constituted a horizontal agreement among competing venue operators to refuse to deal with a particular artist.”
Bryan goes on to identify the type of evidence that could be significant to such a claim.
“A communication showing an agreement or ultimatum among competing venue operators would be highly significant,” he explains, adding that an “email, text message, meeting note, or witness testimony” showing that multiple stadium owners agreed to collectively refuse to host Macklemore or pressure a tour to remove him “would dramatically strengthen an antitrust case.”
“Conversely, evidence showing that each venue independently evaluated and rejected the booking for its own reasons would substantially weaken such a claim,” Bryan concludes.
Read the full article in The Mirror.
Bryan Sullivan Discusses Legal Considerations for Macklemore’s Team in Light of Ed Sheeran Tour Controversy with NBC News
Category: News, Press | Wednesday, September 16th, 2026 | Comments Off on Bryan Sullivan Discusses Legal Considerations for Macklemore’s Team in Light of Ed Sheeran Tour Controversy with NBC News
Bryan Sullivan recently spoke with NBC News about the potential legal challenges Macklemore and his team could face if they pursue legal action following his removal from Ed Sheeran’s tour. The article, titled “Ed Sheeran addresses Macklemore’s tour exit amid Robert Kraft boycott claims,” examines the decision to remove Macklemore from Sheeran’s stadium tour, as well as the subsequent reactions and legal considerations encompassing the event.
On September 14, 2026, Macklemore was removed as opener from Sheeran’s tour, just ten days after joining on September 4, 2026. During one of his first and only performances as an opener at MetLife Stadium, Macklemore shouted “Free Palestine” while performing on stage.
According to Macklemore, following the performance, New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft contacted Sheeran and threatened to cancel the show if Macklemore remained in the lineup, citing his “recent actions,” and further alleged that Kraft contacted other stadiums to issue similar ultimatums. Sheeran responded to these allegations, stating he spoke with Robert Kraft in an attempt to find a resolution; however, Macklemore’s contract was with the promoter, who ultimately decided to remove him from the show.
It has not yet been confirmed whether Macklemore intends to pursue legal action. Speaking with NBC News, Bryan highlights several legal considerations that may create challenges if his team ultimately decides to take legal action, specifically, promoters’ broad discretion to terminate acts in touring contracts.
Bryan goes on to note another central aspect: broadly worded “behavior clauses.” He explains to NBC News that these clauses can restrict artists from engaging in behavior that promoters could interpret as controversial or damaging to their reputation.
Read the full article in NBC News.
Bryan Sullivan Speaks to The Los Angeles Times About the Possibility of Trump Taking Retaliatory Actions Through DOJ in Fox-Roku deal
Category: News, Press | Thursday, September 10th, 2026 | Comments Off on Bryan Sullivan Speaks to The Los Angeles Times About the Possibility of Trump Taking Retaliatory Actions Through DOJ in Fox-Roku deal
Bryan Sullivan recently spoke with The Los Angeles Times about the Fox Corporation’s proposed acquisition of Roku, a San Jose-based streaming service, following the DOJ’s request for additional information as it reviews the details of the merger.
The article, titled “DOJ seeks more information on $22 billion Roku deal after Trump blasts ouster of Fox News host,” outlines the timeline of the merger, announced in June, that hit a snag this week. The requests follow Fox’s dismissal of long-time anchor Maria Bartiromo and President Trump’s public disapproval of the decision.
The president has been known to take action against networks that say or do things he disagrees with, signalling this merger may be in for additional scrutiny by his DOJ. This could be standard, however, as a second request for information was also made when reviewing Paramount Skydance’s deal to buy Warner Bros. Discovery.
Bryan tells the LA Times that he believes Trump’s unpredictable nature makes the outcome nearly impossible to predict.
“You never know what Trump is going to seize on and decide he wants to do,” Bryan shares. “It’s chaos in the federal government and it could very well happen because of that reason, but it could also just be a blip and not a big deal.”
Read the full article in The Los Angeles Times.
Early Sullivan Emerges Victorious in New Mexico on a Case with National Significance for Sexual Abuse Survivors
Category: News, Results, Results | Wednesday, September 2nd, 2026 | Comments Off on Early Sullivan Emerges Victorious in New Mexico on a Case with National Significance for Sexual Abuse Survivors
Devin McRae and Peter Scott prevailed in the New Mexico Court of Appeals on behalf of a sexually abused plaintiff against several defendants including the local and national Boys & Girls Clubs organizations.
Early Sullivan represented its client in one of 13 cases brought by different firms and plaintiffs against the Boys & Girls Clubs organizations for sexual abuse spanning nearly a decade.
While the other plaintiffs dismissed their claims against the Boys & Girls Clubs of America national organization after settling with the local organization, Early Sullivan continued undaunted on behalf of its client. The national organization then filed three summary adjudication motions targeting the Firm’s client’s claims, arguing the national organization could not be held responsible for the conduct of the local Boys & Girls Club.
The New Mexico trial court granted all three summary adjudication motions against the Firm’s client, adhering to the standard reasoning applied in Catholic Church and Boy Scouts of America precedents; namely that national bodies do not maintain adequate control over local chapters or individual perpetrators of abuse.
Upon appeal, and as explained in the opinion, the Firm successfully demonstrated that the national entity imposes extensive membership mandates on local affiliates including (1) directly influencing their funding, (2) requiring regular financial and operational reports, (3) requiring mandatory activity updates, and (4) requiring prominent branding with the Boys & Girls Club of America, Inc.’s logo across all facilities and materials.
The New Mexico Court of Appeals found that Early Sullivan sufficiently distinguished its case from the Catholic Church and Boy Scouts of America lines of cases and, therefore, sufficient evidence of control by the national organization was presented to take the case to a jury.
This decision carries national importance for sexual abuse survivors. Rather than restricting claims to local entities that often lack adequate resources to fully compensate victims, it establishes a framework for holding parent organizations accountable. The published decision is entitled, John Doe 13 v. Boys & Girls Clubs of America, Inc., Boys & Girls Clubs of Central New Mexico, Dominic Yannoni, and David Michaelback.