Goldberg v. Paris Hilton Entm't, Inc. - No. 08-22261-CIV-MORE, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80530 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 17, 2009)

Rule:

Any causal connection between an alleged breach and the plaintiff’s damages are speculative and therefore, not sufficient to allow for reliance damages.

Facts:

Plaintiff, Michael I. Goldberg, as court-appointed Receiver for Worldwide Entertainment Group, Inc., has been assigned any claims and causes of action that Pledge This, LLC may have against Defendants Paris Hilton Entertainment, Inc. and Paris Hilton individually. Plaintiff filed a complaint for breach of contract against both Defendants and alleged that Paris Hilton, a celebrity promoter, failed to promote the film, National Lampoon's Pledge This!, Paris Hilton played the lead role in the said film. Plaintiff sought for damages which included the cost of production and the $1 million paid to the defendant. Defendant claimed that she promoted the film properly and that no further appearances by her would have overcome the producers' failure to properly promote it. Plaintiff premises his theory of damages on reliance when he asserted that the producers of Pledge This! relied on the defendant’s future promotion of a DVD release when they spent million dollars in making the film.

Issue:

Was the plaintiff’s theory of a causal connection between the defendant’s alleged breach and the investors’ damages correct?

Answer:

No. Plaintiff’s claim of reliance was entirely speculative.

Conclusion:

The Court held that any causal connection between the defendant’s alleged breaches and the financial ruin of the film was wholly speculative and therefore cannot entitle the plaintiff to a recovery. Plaintiff also failed to satisfy the Court that any of his alleged reliance damages were foreseeable. He could not produce evidence that the film’s commercial failure was due to any lack of performance on the defendant’s part. Importantly, the plaintiff produced no evidence that the defendant’s agreement to promote the film induced any of the investors’ investments. In other words, the investors did not make their investments in reliance on Hilton’s promotion. Moreover, it was the Court that found compelling evidence in the record that Pledge This! lost money because the film's inexperienced producers hastily cobbled together a wholly inadequate marketing plan.