United States First Circuit

In three consolidated appeals, arising out of the improper use of a model's image to package and promote a home entertainment system, district court's judgment is affirmed where: 1) a new trial on damages is not warranted as plaintiff has not shown that the district court's order partially granting her motion to compel constituted an abuse of discretion, nor has she shown that the district court's omission of her proposed instruction constituted plain error or that it likely altered the damages award; 2) defendants have waived their claim that trial on plaintiff's right-to-publicity and privacy claims should never have taken place in the first instance; and 3) the district court's decision to deny defendant's request for attorneys' fees under section 1117(a), as well as defendant's request for fees under section 1927, was well within the bounds of its discretion.

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/23/2010
• Published 11/23/2010

Judges

• HOWARD

Court

• United States First Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• David K. Friedland, Gregory A. Madera