United States: Case In Point: The Danger Of Dissimilar Comparables

Daryl K. Washington et al., v. Kellwood Company

The Washington v. Kellwood case is a good example of a plaintiff failing to apply the appropriate amount of review when selecting a proxy or yardstick. When using this approach to damages, particular care should be taken when selecting a proxy for a nascent business without a baseline history of revenues. Damages experts have leeway when selecting comparable firms to use as comparables in a yardstick approach. However, in this case the Court found that, selecting an established business with revenues exceeding the plaintiff's revenues by a factor of 1,000 stretched the "reasonableness" requirements too far. Damages in litigation are not likely to get simpler anytime soon, and the Washington v. Kellwood case highlights the importance of carefully selecting a similar proxy firm(s) when using the yardstick approach to damages calculations.

Introduction

In the often complex world of damages calculations in litigation, attorneys and financial experts rarely, if ever, encounter the same set of circumstances twice. While this can contribute to the challenge and appeal of these professions, pitfalls in damages calculation approaches are ever-present. One such potential pitfall is the use of comparable companies as proxies or yardsticks for measurement of damages sought in litigation. While the use of comparable companies in lost profits calculations is well-recognized and established, one recent case demonstrates the risks of using comparables that are not reasonably similar to the firm that is the subject of the lost profits calculation.

The risk of selecting a company that is too "speculative" for use as a proxy in a lost profits calculation was clearly highlighted in the matter Daryl K. Washington et al., v. Kellwood Company.1. In this matter, the plaintiff expert's use of the clothing company Under Armour as a proxy for the plaintiff's damages calculation was deemed "too speculative," and, according to the Court's decision, the plaintiff "did not prove that its new and untested business would have achieved vast market success but for Kellwood's (defendant) breaches."2.

Case Background

The plaintiff, Daryl Washington, owner of the "Sunday Players" brand name, sued Kellwood Company for an alleged breach of a licensing agreement to manufacture and market a line of sport compression clothing under the Sunday Players name. A large clothing manufacturer that focused on "private label" arrangements, Kellwood often manufactured specialized clothing lines for retailers and marketers such as Sunday Players under their individual brand names. Founded in 2002 by Washington, Sunday Players was a start-up clothing brand focused on the sport compression segment, a fast-growing apparel segment. Licensing negotiations between Sunday Players and Kellwood began in early 2003 and proceeded amid discussions between Kellwood and MTV about a potential promotion agreement pitching the Sunday Players clothing line. With an MTV deal still possible, Sunday Players and Kellwood agreed to a 3-year licensing and manufacturing arrangement in November 2003 whereby Kellwood obtained exclusive license to manufacture, market, sell, and distribute Sunday Players labeled apparel. In addition to the production capability, Sunday Players, which was still a nascent brand, would receive 5% in royalties from all sales.3. The promotion deal with MTV never took place however, and other problems with the partnership execution developed resulting in Kellwood terminating the license agreement in March 2005.4.

In the lawsuit filed by Washington in November of 2005, Sunday Players contended that Kellwood breached the licensing agreement by failing to market the Sunday Players brand name appropriately per the agreement and for terminating it early. A summary judgement ruled that Kellwood did breach the license agreement by terminating too early and failed to provide adequate sampling as part of the marketing campaign. A trial followed in February of 2016 to determine whether Kellwood also breached the agreement by failing to make reasonable marketing efforts, and a jury found Kellwood liable. Washington was subsequently awarded $4,350,000 in lost profits damages resulting from the breach.5. In July 2016 however, Judge Sarah Netburn, US Magistrate Judge from the Southern District of New York, agreed with Kellwood's arguments that Sunday Player's alleged damages were not sufficiently supported. Judge Netburn vacated the entire $4,350,000 award in her July 15, 2016 Opinion & Order and concluded that the jury's lost profits award relied on overly speculative evidence and projections. While the court afforded the plaintiff a motion for reconsideration in order to prove damages from lost profits, in September 2016 the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration was denied. Judge Netburn retained the vacated damages decision because of the plaintiff's failure to present a reasonable comparable company for revenue and lost profits measurement.

Lost Profits/Damages

Sunday Player's damages expert used a yardstick approach to estimate revenue in a lost profits calculation and selected Under Armour, the billion-dollar clothing and accessories company, as an appropriate comparable to Sunday Players.6. Using Under Armour's historical revenues as a baseline, the expert argued Under Armour's moisture-wicking apparel products, distribution channels, branding, and business strategy were similar to Sunday Players. Importantly, he compared Kellwood's MTV promotion opportunity to a 2003 advertising and marketing agreement between Under Armour and ESPN, arguing that Kellwood's MTV agreement would have resulted in similar success for Sunday Players. To estimate Sunday Player's 2005-2007 revenue, Barnes then discounted Under Armour's 2002-2004 sales figures by 50% stating that the 2002-2004 time period was the appropriate comparable time frame and the 50% discount reflected Under Armour's dominance of the market and the apparel competitive landscape.

Analysis

The yardstick approach, often employed by damages practitioners to estimate revenue as part of a lost profits analysis, is a well-recognized and established method for lost profits calculation in business litigation.7. In the yardstick approach, a practitioner selects a firm or group of firms similar to the plaintiff and assumes that but for the defendant's actions, the plaintiff would perform the same relative to the comparable(s).8. For the approach to be valid, the comparable firm or group of firms must be similar enough to the plaintiff to be relied upon as an indication of performance. There are important considerations, however, in the selection of the yard stick approach, especially in the selection of the comparable firm(s) used in the calculation.

In addition, according to the decision in this matter, under New York law "lost profits need not be 'be determined with mathematical precision,' but they must 'be capable of measurement based upon known reliable factors without undue speculation.'"9. A lost profits calculation should have a "stable foundation for a reasonable estimate" or it "fails for uncertainty."10.

Under Armour, a company founded in 1996, raised $157 million in its November 2005 initial public offering. Its 2004 revenue was $205 million and its average annual revenue growth rate between 2002-2004 exceeded 100%. Sunday Player's, a company founded in 2002, had little to no capital and no manufacturing capability at the time of the licensing agreement with Kellwood. Its annual revenues were less than $200,000.11.

Despite Sunday Players nascent status, plaintiff's expert concluded Kellwood would have sold more than $82 million of Sunday Players merchandise during the term of the licensing agreement. In one New York case, however, the Court found that "evidence of lost profits from a new business venture receives greater scrutiny because there is no track record upon which to base an estimate."12. In the same case, the Court found that comparable firms' revenues are pertinent when "plaintiff's business bears a close comparison to the proposed business, the products or services involved are standardized, and the profits do not depend heavily on local or personal management skills."13. Under Armour was the industry leader for moisture-wicking apparel while Sunday Players lacked any significant market share. In fact, Judge Netburn cited the comparison to Under Armour as "little more than the entrepreneur's cheerful prognostications."14.

Footnotes

1. Daryl K. Washington et al., v. Kellwood Company, United States District Court Southern District of New York, Civil Action No. 05-CV-10034 (SN)

2. Daryl K. Washington et al., v. Kellwood Company, United States District Court Southern District of New York, Opinion & Order, July 15, 2016 ("Opinion and Order"), at 1.

3. Id. at 4.

4. Id. at 6.

5. Id. at 8.

6. Id. at 7.

7. Litigation Services Handbook Fifth Edition, The Role of the Financial Expert, 28-29, (Roman L. Weil, Daniel G. Lentz & and David P. Hoffman), 5th ed., 2012

8. Id. at 28

9. Daryl K. Washington et al., v. Kellwood Company Opinion & Order July 15, 2016 at 13 (Ashland Mgmt., Inc. v. Janien, 82 N.Y.2d 395,403 (1993).

10. Daryl K. Washington et al., v. Kellwood Company Opinion & Order July 15, 2016 at 13 (Freund v. Washington Sq. Press, Inc., 34 N.Y. 2nd 379, 383 (1974)).

11. Daryl K. Washington et al., v. Kellwood Company Opinion & Order July 15, 2016 at 14.

12. Id. at 13 (Schonfeld v. Hilliard, 218 F.3d 164, 172 (2d Cir.2000) (McLaughlin, J.)

13. Id. at 13 (Schonfeld v. Hilliard, 218 F.3d at 174)

14. Id. at 25.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions