U-Haul International, Inc. v. Jartran, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
793 F.2d 1034 (1986)
Relevant factsFree
Jartran's (defendant) national comparative advertising campaign against market leader U-Haul (plaintiff) dramatically boosted Jartran's revenue while causing U-Haul's first-ever revenue decline; U-Haul sued for false advertising and undertook its own $13.6 million corrective-advertising campaign to counter the public misperception Jartran's ads created, and the district court awarded U-Haul $40 million by combining Jartran's own $6 million campaign cost with U-Haul's $13.6 million corrective costs, then doubling the total under Lanham Act discretion.
IssueFree
Whether the cost of a corrective-advertising campaign is part of an appropriate remedy for false comparative advertising.
Related cases
United Industries Corp. v. Clorox Co.140 F.3d 1175 (1998)Big O Tire Dealers, Inc. v. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company561 F.2d 1365 (10th Cir. 1977)College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board527 U.S. 666 (1999)Johnson & Johnson * Merck Consumer Pharmaceuticals Co. v. SmithKline Beecham Corp.960 F.2d 94 (2d Cir. 1992)Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc.572 U.S. 545 (2014)