Gasperini v. Ctr. for Humanities - 66 F.3d 427 (2d Cir. 1995)

Rule:

New York law, in setting damages for lost transparencies, requires a consideration of (1) the uniqueness of the transparencies and (2) the earning level of the photographer.

Facts:

Appellee photographer filed a diversity action against appellant client after appellant lost some 300 slides belonging to appellee. Appellant admitted liability, and a jury trial was held to determine damages. At the trial, expert testimony was admitted, over appellant's objection, that the "industry standard" valued the lost slides at $ 1500 each. The jury returned a verdict in appellee's favor in the amount of $ 450,000. Appellant's motion for a new trial was denied. Appellant sought review of the decision. 

Issue:

Were the damages awarded to appellee excessive, thereby entitling appellant to a new trial? 

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

On appeal, the court set aside the jury's verdict and ordered a new trial unless appellee was willing to acquiesce to an award of $ 100,000. The court so ruled because it found that a reasonable jury could have awarded damages of up to $ 1,500 per slide only for certain slides as to which there was plausible evidence of significant uniqueness. As to the remaining slides, the court found that, in light of appellee's limited earnings as a photographer and the lack of uniqueness of the slides, any damage award of more than $ 100 per transparency was excessive. The court thus concluded that any award totaling more than $ 100,000 exceeded reasonable compensation.