Hollywood Fantasy Corporation v. Gabor

151 F.3d 203 (1998)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P charged each vacation 'client' $ 7,500 for a week of 'pampering,' instruction on making movies, rehearsals, and a 'starring' role in a short videotaped film with a 'nationally known' television or movie star. P hoped that 'bloopers' and 'outtakes' from the videotapes would ultimately become the basis for a television series. P had conducted only one vacation event before the package scheduled to take place in San Antonio in May 1991. The first event, held in Palm Springs, California, had received some media coverage but had lost money. P negotiated with D over an appearance in San Antonio. P alleged an agreement and D claimed there was none. In any event, D sent a telegram to invoke the out clause claiming that she was due to be involved in preproduction and a promotion film for a motion picture Queen of Justice produced by Metro Films of Los Angeles. P unsuccessfully attempted to replace D for the San Antonio event. The San Antonio event was canceled; the two ticket purchasers received their money back; P went out of business; and this litigation began. Following a default judgment on liability and a jury trial on damages, the jury awarded P $3,000,000. The district court entered final judgment in that amount. D moved to set aside the judgment on the ground that she did not receive notice of the docket call. The district court granted D's motion to vacate the judgment and ordered a new trial. After a second trial, the jury awarded Hollywood Fantasy $100,000 on its breach of contract claim and $100,000 on its fraud claim. The district court set aside the jury's fraud verdict on the ground that P had failed to show any fraudulent inducement or material misrepresentation. The district court found that a contract did exist between P and D; rejecting D's argument that her handwritten changes to the March 4, 1991 letter materially modified and rejected P's offer. The district court also upheld the jury's finding that Ms. Gabor's cancellation was not based on 'a significant acting opportunity in a film,' as the contract permitted. D appealed.