Ticketmaster Class Action Lawsuit December 2025, Billions At Stake As Judge Certifies Antitrust Claims

Federal judge grants class certification for nationwide antitrust lawsuit against Live Nation and Ticketmaster, covering 400 million ticket purchases since 2010. Plaintiffs seek treble damages under Sherman Act for alleged monopolistic pricing practices that inflated ticketing fees to supracompetitive levels.

What Is the Ticketmaster Class Action Lawsuit About?

U.S. District Judge George Wu certified a nationwide class action on December 12, 2025, accusing Live Nation Entertainment and Ticketmaster of using monopoly power to inflate ticket prices and fees. The lawsuit spans 15 years and involves more than 400 million ticket purchases.

The consumer suit, filed in 2022, alleges Live Nation and Ticketmaster unlawfully monopolized primary ticketing services for major concert venues and used that market power to impose supracompetitive fees and inflate overall ticket costs. Under federal antitrust law, successful plaintiffs can recover triple their actual damages.

The class covers all U.S. consumers who bought primary tickets and paid associated fees for events at major concert venues through Ticketmaster or an affiliated Live Nation entity dating back to 2010.

Multiple Legal Fronts: Antitrust and Consumer Protection Claims

Ticketmaster faces two distinct waves of class action litigation in December 2025:

Antitrust Class Action (Filed 2022)

The named plaintiffs seek to represent all U.S. purchasers who directly bought a primary ticket and paid fees for ticketing services for an event at a major concert venue from Ticketmaster at any point since 2010. This proposed class includes millions of people.

The plaintiffs say Live Nation pays the world’s biggest artists over the top to arrange their tours and makes up its losses from these arrangements by coercing concert venues in long-term, exclusive contracts to use Ticketmaster to handle the ticket sales. Ticketmaster allegedly dominates the market for tickets at large concert venues and can charge fans excessive fees in the primary market.

Consumer Protection Class Action (Filed March 2025)

The lawsuit was filed in March 2025 by a group of ticket buyers from California, Florida, New York, and Illinois who seek to represent statewide classes of consumers who purchased tickets through Ticketmaster and paid extra fees that were not included in the initially advertised price. Case caption: Madrigal et al. v. Ticketmaster LLC et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-02375.

The 56-page complaint characterizes Ticketmaster’s practice as a classic “bait and switch” where consumers are initially shown an artificially low ticket price, only to discover large, mandatory fees as they finalize their purchase. By the time the true price is revealed—including service fees, facility charges, and processing fees—consumers face a short “countdown clock” that pressures them to complete the purchase.

Ticketmaster Class Action Lawsuit December 2025, Billions at Stake as Judge Certifies Antitrust Claims

Legal Framework: Sherman Act and State Consumer Protection Laws

Federal Antitrust Claims

The Justice Department’s parallel antitrust lawsuit alleges that Live Nation-Ticketmaster unlawfully exercises its monopoly power in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act. The consumer class action relies on the same legal framework.

Section 4 of the Clayton Act provides that any person who shall be injured in business or property by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws may sue for treble damages, prejudgment interest, and costs of suit, including attorney fees. This treble damage provision makes antitrust class actions particularly valuable to plaintiffs.

Under federal antitrust law, plaintiffs are entitled to treble their actual damages if they prevail. Given the 15-year scope and 400 million tickets involved, potential damages could reach billions of dollars.

State Consumer Protection Claims

The consumer protection lawsuit alleges violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, California Business and Professions Code, New York General Business Law, California Unfair Competition Law, Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, and New York Arts and Cultural Affairs Law.

The plaintiffs characterize the practice as drip pricing—advertising one price to get customers on the website and then switching to a higher price by adding fees at the last moment.

December 2025 Class Certification: Major Victory for Plaintiffs

On December 12, 2025, Judge Wu ruled that the plaintiffs met the requirements to move forward as a class under federal rules. This represents a critical milestone that substantially raises the stakes for Live Nation and Ticketmaster.

Live Nation argued class treatment was inappropriate because ticketing practices and fee structures vary across roughly 1,000 venues and that venues, not Ticketmaster, often set many of the fees consumers pay. The judge rejected those arguments at the certification stage.

The December 12 filing reflects a key procedural refinement aimed at a recurring fight in consumer cases against major ticketing companies. The parties agreed to amend the proposed class definition to expressly exclude any purchaser who is judicially determined to be subject to an enforceable arbitration agreement with Ticketmaster or Live Nation.

This stipulation allows the class to move forward even if the defendants later persuade the court that some buyers must resolve claims through arbitration. Those individuals would be carved out rather than forcing the litigation into a more complicated subclass structure.

Arbitration Battle: Supreme Court Declines to Intervene

On October 6, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up Live Nation and Ticketmaster’s bid to force the case into arbitration, leaving in place a Ninth Circuit decision that kept the consumer claims in federal court. That ruling removed one of the most significant off-ramps the companies sought before the class certification fight.

The Ninth Circuit found Ticketmaster’s arbitration contract substantively and procedurally unconscionable to an extreme degree, backing the lower court’s refusal to sever the offending provisions in the terms and rules. The appellate court rejected the argument that the Federal Arbitration Act preempted California’s unconscionability law.

What Damages Are at Stake?

The plaintiffs’ attorneys wrote that common proof shows defendants’ anticompetitive conduct harmed millions of consumers by inflating Ticketmaster’s primary ticketing service fees to supracompetitive levels nationwide, which led to virtually every consumer paying an illegal overcharge.

Live Nation could potentially face billions of dollars in damages if the case goes before a jury. The treble damage provision under federal antitrust law means actual damages would be multiplied by three.

According to the complaint, in 2023, Live Nation, through Ticketmaster LLC, collected fees on 329 million tickets. Extrapolated over the proposed class period from 2010 to present, defendants allegedly collected fees on as many as 1 billion tickets.

Consumer Protection Lawsuit Status

On July 8, 2025, U.S. District Judge John F. Walter ruled on the defendants’ motion to dismiss in the Madrigal consumer protection case, issuing a brief order denying the motion and allowing the case to move forward.

Ticketmaster and Live Nation moved to dismiss the first amended complaint in May 2025, arguing that the plaintiffs failed to state any viable claim of deception and that even if the pricing was poorly received by customers, it does not rise to a legally actionable injury. The defendants invoked the voluntary payment doctrine—since the buyers voluntarily paid the fees, they argue the consumers cannot later claim those charges as damages.

Judge Walter concluded that the issues raised by Ticketmaster would be more appropriately resolved on a motion for summary judgment after evidence is gathered. The case is now in discovery, with plaintiffs seeking internal documents to prove Ticketmaster intentionally concealed fees to boost profits.

Ticketmaster’s Defense Arguments

Venue-by-Venue Variations

Tim O’Mara, an attorney for Live Nation and Ticketmaster, argued the plaintiffs failed to show that all buyers of concert tickets were similarly impacted by the companies’ purported anticompetitive conduct.

The company identified the proposal’s most glaring flaw as an alleged failure to establish a reliable, class-wide method for proving antitrust impact in the face of the venue-by-venue variation inherent in Ticketmaster’s individualized negotiations.

Disclosure Arguments

Ticketmaster argued fees were disclosed in multiple different ways—a claim that will be tested against the plaintiffs’ experiences. The defendants assert that no one was harmed because the total purchase price at checkout disclosed all fees before completion.

Defendants also contend that the request for injunctive relief is moot because now that the plaintiffs are aware of the alleged deception, they cannot be misled by it in the future.

Who Can Join the Class Action and Claim Damages?

Antitrust Class Definition

The class covers U.S. consumers who bought primary tickets and paid associated fees for events at major concert venues through Ticketmaster or an affiliated Live Nation entity dating back to 2010.

The class excludes any purchaser judicially determined to be subject to an enforceable arbitration agreement with Ticketmaster or Live Nation that governs the claims asserted in the lawsuit.

Consumer Protection Classes

The consumer protection lawsuit looks to represent all residents of California, New York, Illinois and Florida who, during the applicable statute of limitations period, paid an added fee to the defendants through the desktop or mobile versions of LiveNation.com, Ticketmaster.com or through the companies’ apps where the price initially displayed to the consumer did not include the amount of the added fee.

Automatic Inclusion

Most consumers do not need to take any action to join class action lawsuits when they’re initially filed. If the class is certified and a settlement is reached or judgment is entered, class members will receive notice about how to claim their share of any recovery or how to opt out if they prefer to pursue individual claims.

FTC Lawsuit Adds Regulatory Pressure

The Federal Trade Commission, joined by attorneys general from seven states (Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Nebraska, Tennessee, Utah, and Virginia), filed a sweeping lawsuit on September 18, 2025, against Live Nation Entertainment and Ticketmaster in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

The FTC accuses Ticketmaster of using bait-and-switch tactics in its pricing—advertising tickets at one rate, then tacking on mandatory fees late in the checkout process that can increase the total price by more than forty percent.

The FTC alleges that from 2019 to 2024, consumers paid more than $16.4 billion in fees to Ticketmaster, often revealed only late in the transaction. The FTC lawsuit seeks civil penalties and monetary relief under Section 5(a) of the FTC Act and the Better Online Ticket Sales (BOTS) Act.

Enforcement Mechanisms and Compliance

Federal Antitrust Enforcement

If plaintiffs prevail in the antitrust class action, the court can:

Award treble damages to all class members
Issue injunctive relief requiring changes to business practices
Award attorney’s fees and costs
Impose ongoing monitoring and compliance requirements

The certified consumer class action continues in parallel with the Justice Department’s separate antitrust lawsuit brought with a coalition of states. That government case seeks structural relief and is scheduled for trial beginning March 2, 2026.

State Consumer Protection Enforcement

State attorneys general have independent authority to enforce consumer protection laws. Each participating state invokes its own consumer protection laws, asserting violations for deceptive trade practices, unfair competition, and misleading statements, particularly with respect to how Ticketmaster advertises prices and enforces ticket-purchase limits.

Similar Class Actions and Precedent

Canadian Settlement

A class action lawsuit was commenced against Live Nation Entertainment and Ticketmaster in Canada regarding marketing practices with respect to price representations and non-optional fees for tickets purchased from Ticketmaster.

The Canadian settlement covered tickets purchased between September 1, 2015 and June 30, 2018 by residents of Canada for events in Canada (excluding Quebec). Credit Eligible Class Members who made claims by June 11, 2025, received credit vouchers.

Mass Arbitration Alternative

Attorneys believe Ticketmaster customers could have claims worth anywhere from $50 to thousands of dollars under state law, and they’re signing people up to take action via mass arbitration. This strategy combines elements of individual representation with collective power, potentially leading to larger individual payouts than traditional class actions.

What This Means for Consumer Rights in Ticketing

Drip Pricing Under Scrutiny

The litigation reflects a broader enforcement trend against drip pricing, where companies disclose mandatory fees only late in the purchasing process. The FTC’s ban on junk fees, which went into effect in May 2025, specifically targets this practice.

Transparency Standards

Judge Walter’s decision to let the Ticketmaster fee lawsuit proceed is significant because it establishes that the plaintiffs’ allegations—if true—describe a potentially actionable deceptive practice. The court’s refusal to dismiss the case sends a message that practices like drip pricing might give rise to viable claims under consumer protection laws.

Market Dominance Concerns

The complaint references Ticketmaster’s control of over 70% of the ticketing market, claiming that this gives credence to the idea that without a singular, monopolistic company, Ticketmaster’s excessive fees and rates would be impossible.

As a result of its conduct, music fans in the United States are deprived of ticketing innovation and forced to use outdated technology while paying more for tickets than fans in other countries.

What Happens Next?

Discovery Phase

With the motion to dismiss denied, the Madrigal v. Ticketmaster lawsuit is moving into the discovery phase. Both sides will gather evidence—plaintiffs will seek internal documents, communications, and data from Ticketmaster to support their claims about intentional fee concealment and consumer impact.

Government Trial

The Justice Department’s antitrust suit is expected to receive a final pretrial conference on February 17, 2026, with trial beginning March 2, 2026.

Settlement Negotiations

To be able to proceed as a class will give the plaintiffs more leverage to try to negotiate a significant settlement because Live Nation could potentially face billions of dollars in damages if the case goes before a jury.

Appeal Possibilities

Live Nation and Ticketmaster explicitly reserved their rights to seek arbitration of excluded buyers’ claims, pursue appellate review of any class certification order, or later seek to decertify the class.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I still join the Ticketmaster class action lawsuit?

If you purchased tickets through Ticketmaster at major concert venues since 2010, you are likely automatically included in the certified class. You don’t need to take action now unless you receive official notice requiring a response. Class members will be notified if a settlement is reached or judgment is entered.

How much money could I receive from the class action?

Damage amounts depend on multiple factors including total class size, amount of fees paid, and whether plaintiffs prevail at trial or reach a settlement. Under federal antitrust law, actual damages are tripled, potentially making individual recoveries more substantial than typical class actions.

What’s the difference between the antitrust lawsuit and the consumer protection lawsuit?

The antitrust class action alleges monopolistic behavior that inflated prices through market dominance and exclusive contracts. The consumer protection lawsuit focuses on deceptive pricing practices and hidden fees. Both can proceed simultaneously and may result in separate recoveries.

When will the cases be resolved?

Class action litigation typically takes years to resolve. The discovery phase is ongoing in the consumer protection case, while the government’s parallel antitrust trial begins March 2, 2026. Settlement negotiations may occur at any stage.

Can Ticketmaster force me into arbitration?

The class definition excludes any purchaser judicially determined to be subject to an enforceable arbitration agreement. However, the Supreme Court declined to force the overall case into arbitration in October 2025. If you’re excluded from the class due to arbitration clauses, you may pursue mass arbitration claims separately.

What if I bought tickets for events outside the U.S.?

The certified antitrust class covers tickets purchased for events at major concert venues in the United States. International purchases may not qualify. The consumer protection classes are limited to residents of California, New York, Illinois, and Florida.

Will Ticketmaster change its pricing practices?

If plaintiffs succeed, the court could issue injunctive relief requiring Ticketmaster to display all mandatory fees upfront. The FTC’s September 2025 lawsuit also seeks to force pricing transparency changes. Companies often modify practices during litigation to reduce liability.

Sources:

About the Author

Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah

Ticketmaster Class Action Lawsuit December 2025, Billions at Stake as Judge Certifies Antitrust Claims