James B. Astrachan on Russell Christoff v. Nestle USA, Inc. 47 Cal. 4th 468 (2009)

The purpose of the "single publication rule" is to control damages resulting from mass communications so that a repeated communication does not create new causes of action. While some occurrences of a single publication are rather straight forward, those in Christoff v. Nestle USA, Inc., 47 Cal. 4th 468 (Cal. 2009) were not. In this Analylsis, James B. Astrachan discusses the Christoff case. He writes:

     In 1986 professional model Russell Christoff posed for a photo that he was told might be used on vacuum packed bricks of coffee to be sold in Canada. He was paid $250 and promised $2,000 if the photo was used. In 2002 he discovered that his photo had been used in the United States on TASTER'S CHOICE coffee jars, and later discovered that his photo had been used for at least 5 years on coffee labels and other facets of Nestle's international advertising campaign. He brought his action for misappropriation of his identity under California Civil Code, §3344 within one year of learning of Nestle's unauthorized uses.

     . . . .

     For Nestle's transgressions, a jury awarded Christoff damages of $15 million, representing a portion of the profits Nestle made from the sale of coffee bearing his photograph. The verdict was rejected by the California Court of Appeals on the grounds that the "single publication" rule, California Civil Code, §3425.3, and limitations required suit to be brought within 2 years following the first publication of the label unless Christoff could prove that Nestle hindered his discovery or that the label had been republished.

     The California Supreme Court affirmed that the jury's verdict must be reversed on three grounds: the trial court's erroneously ruled that the single publication rule does not apply to misappropriation of identity claims; the trial court had not developed sufficient facts to determine if Nestle's actions constituted a single publication; and it could not be determined if limitations had run on Christoff's claim until the court determined whether the single publication rule applied.

Access the full version of James B. Astrachan on Russell Christoff v. Nestle USA, Inc. 47 Cal. 4th 468 (2009) with your lexis.com ID. Additional fees may be incurred. (approx. 4 pages) 

If you do not have a lexis.com ID, you can purchase the Emerging Issues Analysis content through our lexisONE Research Packages