A plaintiff has filed a federal lawsuit against StubHub in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Fort Lauderdale Division (Case No. 0:25-cv-61708-PAB), alleging the company misled fans into paying nearly a thousand dollars for premium seats to see Lionel Messi at Inter Miami.
At the center of the story is Franco Martinez, a close friend of public advocate and plaintiff Brian Evans, who had recently come to the United States seeking asylum from Argentina. For Martinez, the July 30 match represented more than just a game. After receiving encouragement from Messi’s father, Jorge Messi, to bring a sign to the match, Franco spent six hours creating one he hoped Lionel would notice. But when StubHub reassigned their tickets from premium field-side seats to distant bleachers, the gesture was lost — and so was Martinez’ chance to connect with his lifelong hero.
The lawsuit alleges StubHub engaged in deceptive practices by advertising premium seats that did not exist, then downgrading fans into cheaper sections, leaving them with no recourse. Evans argues that this conduct reflects a larger crisis in the ticketing industry — one that impacts millions of consumers.
“Discovery will dictate what StubHub had available to sell, what they actually sold, and what they actually delivered to the customers,” said University of West Florida Professor Gil Fried. “If they were not given certain seats, but sold them anyway then the case has legs. I don’t know if this was a bait-and-switch situation or if there was a possible misunderstanding. We also will need to see the specific language of the purchase agreement and whether there were any specific clauses allowing StubHub to deliver different seats if the seating environment changes. We also will need to see if there were circumstances beyond StubHub’s control that could have impacted the seating availability the day of the event and whether StubHub warned Mr. Evans before the game and offered alternate seating options or the ability to get a refund.”
The plaintiff believes StubHub “continues to advertise premium suites S1 through S23 at Chase Stadium — listings that cannot be purchased through Inter Miami’s official partner Ticketmaster, or any legitimate platform. These are private suites, not public ticket inventory.
“StubHub is marketing something it doesn’t own and can’t deliver,” Evans said. “That is fraud, plain and simple.”
Evans also pointed out that StubHub collects service fees on every transaction.
“They profit off these sales, and then turn around and say they’re just a listing platform,” he said. “You can’t have it both ways. If you’re making money on fraudulent tickets, you’re part of the fraud.”
StubHub is expected to push the case into arbitration, which the plaintiff maintains will “strip consumers of their right to court and shields corporations from accountability.”
In recent years, consumer protection experts have increasingly raised alarms about the ticket resale market. State Attorneys General from multiple states are investigating StubHub’s practices, and courts across the country — including the Eleventh Circuit — are weighing whether arbitration clauses unfairly tilt the playing field against everyday buyers.
Even so, Dr. Fried noted that “courts hate to get involved in these types of cases and the emotional appeal that might come with them.
“For example, what if a father promised their child that the team would win a game and an umpire makes a bad call? Those cases have been litigated, and courts do not want to second guess what goes on the field. They also don’t want to be the gate keeper for whether someone had fun, did not get to see a historic moment, or numerous other variables that are outside the control of the team and venue.”
