Cameo Clips

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided that claim preclusion barred a plaintiff from being awarded actual damages from product licensees of the Baltimore Ravens ' after a jury in an earlier suit by the plaintiff against the football team found that the Ravens infringed on the plaintiff's logo but that an award of profits attributable to the infringement wasn't appropriate. Bouchat v. The Bon-Ton Department Stores, 03-2173. The Fourth Circuit explained: 'That [Frederick] Bouchat did not seek actual damages in Bouchat I but now seeks such damages from the licensees does not alter our conclusion that the claims in Bouchat's cases are identical. The relief Bouchat seeks for the licensees' commercial use of the infringing logo is 'woven together,' ' with the relief he sought against the Bouchat I defendants.' The appeals court added: '[E]valuation of infringement profits must take into account the nature of any actual damages. This link between the remedies Bouchat has sought reinforces our identification of a 'common nucleus of operative facts' in these cases. ' Any plaintiff who sues joint tortfeasors separately bears the risk that an adverse determination in the first action will trigger preclusion doctrines in a later action. Bouchat bore this risk from the time he filed his first action, suing only the Ravens and NFLP [National Football League Properties]. He made this choice, and we have no reason to insulate him from the unfavorable consequences.'