No. 1 Indiana and No. 9 Alabama are set to square off in the 112th Rose Bowl Game on Jan. 1. Known as ‘The Granddaddy of Them All,’ the Rose Bowl has been host to some of the most iconic moments in college football history. Outside of New Year’s Day, though, the historic stadium has been embroiled in a bitter public feud with its main tenant: UCLA.
Back in October, the Rose Bowl Operating Co. and the city of Pasadena, California, filed a lawsuit against UCLA in an attempt to block the university from moving its football games to SoFi Stadium and force them to honor its contract with the stadium and city that keeps the Bruins at the Rose Bowl through 2043.
According to court documents obtained by USA TODAY, the plaintiffs alleged ‘a profound betrayal of trust’ by UCLA for ‘unequivocally expressing its intent to abandon the Rose Bowl Stadium and relocate its home football games to SoFi Stadium in Inglewood.’ Since then, a restraining order has been filed, denied, and both SoFi Stadium and Kroenke Sports and Entertainment (owned by Los Angeles Rams owner Stan Kroenke) have been added as defendants to the lawsuit.
Earlier this month, Ben Bolch of the Los Angeles Times reported that attorneys for the Rose Bowl and Pasadena contended “upon information and belief” that Kroenke executives openly suggested that SoFi Stadium was pursuing UCLA, “demonstrating the SoFi defendants’ intent to induce UCLA’s breach and disturb UCLA’s performance of the agreement” from their contract in late 2024 or early 2025.
With an arbitration hearing looming in January, here’s a timeline of how we got here, and what lies ahead for both parties in 2026:
Rose Bowl-UCLA lawsuit timeline
Oct. 30, 2025
The Rose Bowl Operating Co. and City of Pasadena file a lawsuit against UCLA in Los Angeles County Superior Court, accusing the university of trying to break its lease with the stadium and move Bruins football home games to SoFi Stadium. According to court documents, the plaintiffs allegedly reached out to the defendants in March over the same issue and ‘is now, once again, considering breaking’ the contract, preferring to leave the Rose Bowl ‘sooner rather than later.’
UCLA vice chancellor for strategic communications Mary Osako said in a statement that while the university continues ‘to evaluate the long-term arrangement’ for the Bruins, ‘no decision has been made.”
Nov. 10, 2025
The City of Pasadena and the Rose Bowl file a temporary restraining order to keep UCLA from ending its lease until the pending litigation against the school has been resolved.
‘There is no way to sugarcoat it: UCLA has confirmed its imminent departure, severely destabilizing Plaintiffs’ core operations,’ the filing says. ‘Those operations are structured around and contingent upon UCLA.’
The plaintiffs allege that if UCLA were to move to SoFi Stadium, the monetary damages to the city and stadium could be in the billions. According to Bolch’s reporting, the plaintiffs alleged that ‘uncertainty over UCLA’s football future home already caused one Rose Bowl donor to back out of a $1-million pledge and multiple sponsors to refuse to sign new agreements. Additionally, the plaintiffs contend that the Rose Bowl’s having transitioned its multimedia rights and sponsorship operations to JMI Sports because of its affiliation with UCLA could put the Rose Bowl at risk of further losses because JMI’s sponsorship agreements are ‘expressly structured’ around UCLA football home games.’
Nov. 12, 2025
In a hearing two days later, Judge James C. Chalfant heard arguments from both parties and denied the plaintiffs’ request for a restraining order, citing a ‘lack of emergency’ as UCLA had not made any progress in its attempt to move to SoFi Stadium.
There have been previous cases of TROs being granted in which the New York Yankees, Minnesota Twins and New York Jets have been barred from moving home games, but Chalfant said those teams were scheduled for games within matters of days or weeks. UCLA’s next home game isn’t scheduled until Fall 2026. However, Chalfant did add that the plaintiffs can reapply for an injunction at a later time once both parties have obtained additional evidence.
Dec. 5, 2025
Kroenke Sports and Entertainment and SoFi Stadium were added as defendants to the lawsuit, with the plaintiffs alleging that SoFi Stadium representatives knew about UCLA’s contract with the Rose Bowl, “yet coordinated with UCLA to breach its contractual obligations and abandon the Rose Bowl stadium in favor of playing its home football games at SoFi Stadium.” The plaintiffs further accused KSE and SoFi Stadium of acting ‘with malice in luring UCLA football away from its contractual home in Pasadena.”
In the amended court filings, the City of Pasadena and the Rose Bowl are seeking to force UCLA to play out the remainder of its home football games at the Rose Bowl through the rest of the contract, along with monetary damages from both UCLA, KSE and SoFi Stadium, for UCLA’s breach and/or anticipatory repudiation of contract and from KSE and SoFi Stadium’s ‘interference with UCLA’s commitment to honor its Rose Bowl lease.’
Both parties are scheduled for an arbitration hearing in January.