Gardensensor Inc., Plantsense Inc. v. Stanley Black & Decker Inc., Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc.
Published: Dec. 27, 2014 | Result Date: Nov. 6, 2014 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 3:12-cv-03922-NC Verdict – Defense
Court
USDC Northern
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Max W. Gavron
(Diversity Law Group PC)
Kevin R. Crisp
(Lester & Cantrell, LLP)
Cristina A. Guido
(Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP)
Gregory W. Smith
(Law Offices of Gregory W. Smith LLP)
Experts
Plaintiff
Glenn Sheets
(technical)
Defendant
Karl Ehlert
(technical)
Facts
GardenSensor sued Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc. for breach of contract.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff alleged that it entered a joint venture agreement with defendant, in which defendant agreed to rebrand, manufacture, and market plaintiff's "EasyBloom Plant Sensor" product. Plaintiff further alleged that defendant committed numerous breaches of the agreement, including failing to reasonably oversee the manufacturing process, failing to properly market the rebranded product, failing to spend certain required amounts in marketing placement funds, and failing to make certain royalty payments to plaintiff.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant denied the allegations of plaintiff's complaint.
Settlement Discussions
Plaintiff's demand was $24 million, including $19 million in damages plus $5 million in interest. Defendant's offer under FRCP 68 was $2,950,000 plus costs.
Damages
Plaintiff alleged damages of $25 million. Plaintiff asked the jury to award between $19 million and $20 million. Defendant denied wrongdoing and causation but suggested an appropriate verdict in the event of liability should be $385,000.
Result
After a jury trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant. The jury found that, although defendant failed to perform under the terms of the agreement, plaintiff failed to show that defendant's failure to perform caused harm to plaintiff.
Other Information
Punitive damages were stricken by the court, on motion by defendant under both Delaware law and an express contractual waiver of punitive damages. On motion by defendant, the court declined to enforce the contractual waiver of consequential damages and lost profits under its interpretation of Delaware law. Defendant removed the case to federal court.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390