Court Opinion

ID: 2965028
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:34:20.933358+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:09:45.603131
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 97-2006

                               CHAMPION PRODUCTS INC.,

                                 Plaintiff, Appellee,

                                          v.

                           ARTINE ASDOURIAN, ETC., ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.
                                 ____________________

                      BENTON SILVER, d/b/a Variety Wholesalers,
                                Defendant, Appellant.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                     [Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                 Selya, Circuit Judge,
                                        _____________
                              Cyr, Senior Circuit Judge,
                                   ____________________
                              and Boudin, Circuit Judge.
                                          _____________

                                 ____________________

            Steven R. Whitman on brief for appellant.
            _________________
            Mark  Schonfeld, Nicholas  J. Psyhogeos,  and Sherburne,  Powers &
            _______________  ______________________       ____________________
        Needham, P.C. on brief for appellee Champion Products Inc.
        _____________

                                 ____________________

                                  December 16, 1997
                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.   We have reviewed the record  on appeal and
                 __________

            the  submissions of  the parties.    Appellant Benton  Silver

            ("Silver") conceded liability under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.

               1051 et  seq., and now challenges  the court's calculation
                    __  ____

            of damages and attorney's fees against him.  We find no abuse

            of discretion in the calculation of damages.  See 15 U.S.C.  
                                                          ___

            1117(a).    Where  an  award   based  on  profits  would   be

            inadequate, "the court  may in its discretion  enter judgment

            for such sum as the court shall find to be just, according to

            the circumstances of  the case."  15 U.S.C.   1117(a).  Where

            a  defendant  has  acted  fraudulently  and/or  "palmed  off"

            inferior goods,  the court  may  assess damages  based on  an

            unjust  enrichment   or  deterrence  theory.     Aktiebolaget
                                                             ____________

            Electrolux v. Armatron  Int'l, Inc., 999 F.2d 1,  5 (1st Cir.
            ___________________________________

            1993).

                 We also review cost and attorney's fees awards for abuse

            of  discretion.       Volkswagenwerk   Aktiengesellschaft  v.
                                  _______________________________________

            Wheeler, 814  F.2d 812, 821  (1st Cir. 1987).   The affidavit
            _______

            and  documentation supporting the request for attorney's fees

            here provided no detailed,  contemporaneous time records,  as

            required by Grendel's Den, Inc.  v. Larkin, 749 F.2d 945, 952
                        ______________________________

            (1st Cir. 1984).  Since we have not applied the Grendel's Den
                                                            _____________

            standard in any previous Lanham  Act case, we will not reduce

            or disallow the fee award, as that case recommends.  Instead,

            we remand to the district court, with instructions to provide

                                         -2-

            plaintiff an opportunity  to submit detailed, contemporaneous

            time   records.     To   the  extent   possible,  plaintiff's

            submissions  should  identify  attorney  time expended  while

            pursuing the claim against Silver.  Silver should be given an

            opportunity to respond to plaintiff's submissions.

                 Affirmed  in part,  vacated in  part,  and remanded  for
                 ________________________________________________________

            further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
            _________________________________________________

                                         -3-