Swifties’ Ticketmaster Lawsuit Proceeds Despite Partial Dismissal

Taylor Swift performing live. Photo Credit: Eva Rinaldi

Last month, a federal judge partially dismissed Swifties’ Eras Tour-focused antitrust lawsuit against Live Nation and its Ticketmaster subsidiary. Here’s a closer look at the development and the high-stakes legal battle’s direction heading into 2026.

We previously broke down the partial dismissal (and different components of the case) in detail. But with so many moving parts in play – referring to several ongoing Live Nation actions and the Swifties’ forthcoming fifth amended complaint – a recap will prove useful on multiple levels.

Additionally, recent weeks have delivered other Live Nation/Ticketmaster litigation twists, which are also covered here.

The Eras Tour ‘Concert Ticket Sale Debacle’ Turns Litigious: Did Ticketmaster Leverage Its Alleged Monopoly to Shortchange Fans?

By now, most are aware of the Eras Tour “ticketing fiasco,” complete with more than a few fans’ well-documented issues securing passes.

According to the plaintiffs – hundreds of Swift supporters who allegedly had difficulty obtaining Eras Tour presale tickets – the consumer-harming episode, far from being a simple snag, stemmed from Live Nation/Ticketmaster’s alleged anticompetitive practices.

The way they see the situation, Live Nation allegedly threw its promotion weight around “by requiring the most suitable venues for large concerts…to use Ticketmaster as their exclusive ticket provider.”

This purported misconduct allegedly extinguished competition, caused fans to pay higher ticketing fees, and effectively afforded Ticketmaster a “disincentive to invest in acting with due care to provide competent services.”

Ultimately, the alleged practices therefore “led directly” to the Eras Tour presale “disaster,” per the plaintiffs.

Live Nation and Ticketmaster Push Back, Scoring a Partial-Dismissal Win

Live Nation and Ticketmaster haven’t hesitated to refute the claims – including with an August dismissal push that received a hearing last month.

“Plaintiffs’ inability to purchase highly in-demand concerts tickets [sic] is not a legal wrong, Plaintiffs’ pleading failures are not curable, and their claims should be dismissed with prejudice,” Live Nation/Ticketmaster wrote when seeking dismissal.

As highlighted, the motion to dismiss was partially successful: Judge George Wu in November tossed the customers’ negligence, fraud, and negligent misrepresentation claims without leave to amend, meaning the filing parties won’t have a chance to retool and re-present the involved arguments.

Still standing, however, are four central claims concerning the alleged monopolization of the primary ticketing market, unlawful exclusive dealing, and California’s Unfair Competition Law. The judge also dismissed a breach of contract claim, albeit with leave to amend.

The Eras Tour Suit’s Path Forward: Renewed Dismissal Sub-Dispute Set for Early 2026

In keeping with this leave to amend, the ticked-off ticket customers have until December 31st to file their fifth amended action, Judge Wu confirmed in a December 9th order.

From there, a fresh dismissal debate will run through January and February, culminating with a hearing that’s tentatively scheduled for March 19th.

The Tip of the Litigation Iceberg: Live Nation and Ticketmaster Are Fending Off Multiple Legal Actions from Frustrated Fans

As noted, the Swifties’ complaint is one of multiple filed by frustrated fans against Live Nation and Ticketmaster – not to mention separate suits levied by the Justice Department and the FTC.

Perhaps most notably, Judge Wu is also presiding over an even older action against the companies. Likewise alleging anticompetitive practices, this suit is seemingly destined for class certification.

As things stand, the sizable proposed class would include U.S. customers “who directly purchased a primary ticket [from Live Nation/Ticketmaster] and paid associated fees for primary ticketing services for an event at a major concert venue” from 2010 onward.

But amid a much-publicized showdown regarding the enforceability of Ticketmaster’s arbitration agreement, both sides just recently moved to exclude from the class “any purchaser that is judicially determined in this case to be subject to an enforceable arbitration agreement with Ticketmaster or Live Nation.”