October 01, 2014
September 30, 2014
September 29, 2014
Eleventh Circuit Holds that Net Revenue, Not Profits, Should Determine Damages in FTC Deceptive Marketing Case
The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed a judgment against three individual defendants finding that the district court correctly used net revenue to calculate damages. Defendant-appellants were involved in a mortgage loan scheme in which they solicited financially distressed homeowners and offered them assistance either through loan modifications or bankruptcy. The district court found that the defendant-appellants engaged in deceptive activities relating to the sale and marketing of the mortgage relief and home foreclosure services they offered.
On appeal, the court addressed only the issue of whether the district court abused its discretion in calculating damages by using net revenue. The Eleventh Circuit agreed with defendant-appellants that an award based on consumer losses would be improper, but found that the district court appropriately based the award on the defendant-appellants’ net revenue. In doing so, the Eleventh Circuit rejected defendant-appellants’ argument that profits should have been considered as a basis for the damages award. Agreeing with opinions from the First, Second and Seventh Circuits, the Eleventh Circuit held that a judgment ordering defendants to disgorge only profit (net revenue minus expenses) would inappropriately allow defendants to “deduct costs associated with committing their illegal acts.”
FTC v. Washington Data Resources, Inc., No. 12-13392 (11th Cir. Jan. 16, 2013).
<span class="advertise"> Advertisement </span>
- Owner of Compilation Need Not List Individual Authors to Register Copyright
- Social Media and Spoliation – Can A Client Delete Her Facebook Posts?
- Trulia, Inc. v. Zillow, Inc: Denying Motion for Time Extension CBM2013-00056
- Illinois Federal Court Rules That Settlement Term Sheet Is Not Worth The Paper It’s Written On Re: Putative Class Action
- Notice to Quit on a Tenant: Let’s Get This Straight, An URL Is Not A California Address (At Least In This Case)