Opinion ID: 726060
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Hearsay Affidavit

Text: 28 Conopco contends that the district court erred in basing its finding of prejudice upon the unchallenged hearsay affidavit of Gary Moss, Campbell's Vice-President of Global Advertising (the Moss Affidavit), which was submitted with Campbell's motion for judgment on partial findings. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(c) (party must be fully heard on issue before court may enter judgment against that party). According to Conopco, the district court erroneously relied upon the Moss Affidavit for four propositions: (1) Campbell had cultivated this 'thickness' image at no small cost; (2) Campbell had spent over $75 million on the Prego comparative campaign; (3) consumers have come to associate Prego with thicker than the market leader; and (4) Campbell will lose a significant portion of its investment, including its image as thicker than the market leader, if it abandons its campaign. Because all of these propositions in the Moss Affidavit went unchallenged, Conopco argues that it was erroneous for the district court to rely upon them in making its laches determination. 29 Conopco's argument is without merit. Each proposition cited above is either uncontroverted or supported by the trial testimony of Murray Kessler, a Campbell Vice-President, or Elizabeth Green, an employee of Campbell's advertising agency, Leber Katz. To the extent that the district court relied upon the Moss Affidavit in reaching its ultimate conclusion, that determination was fully supported by the cross-examined trial testimony. Accordingly, the district court's application of laches is fully supported by the record below.