Great Entertainment Merchandise, Inc. v. VN Merchandising, Inc.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
1996 WL 355377 (1996)
- Written by Kyli Cotten, JD
Facts
Great Entertainment Merchandise, Inc. (GEM) (plaintiff) would acquire the merchandising rights to the names and likenesses of artists. GEM sought to obtain a trademark license of singer Vince Neil (defendant) so that it could manufacture and sell merchandise ahead of his upcoming tour. Neil established the loan-out company VN Merchandising, Inc. (VN) (defendant) to hold his rights and ability to issue licenses of his trademark. VN entered into an agreement with GEM, allowing GEM to obtain a license to Neil’s trademark in exchange for a $1 million advance on the expected royalties. The agreement stated that Neil agreed to perform before at least 800,000 paying attendees and that should he not, GEM had the right to recoup its advance. Simultaneously, Neil signed an inducement letter to ensure that he subscribed to the obligations of VN’s contract. At the conclusion of the tour, Neil had performed before only 533,032 attendees. Thus, GEM sought recoupment of its advance and demanded repayment from VN and Neil. Neil refused to pay, and GEM filed suit for breach of contract, alleging against Neil that the inducement letter made him a guarantor of its contract with VN. Neil argued that the letter required him only to use his best efforts to meet his personal obligation of performing before 800,000 attendees. Following discovery, GEM moved for summary judgment. VN conceded liability and did not oppose the motion.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sand, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.