CERTAINTY

Espn, Inc. v. Office of the Commissioner of Baseball

76 F. Supp. 2d 416 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)

Purpose:

ESPN is moving to preclude evidence and argument of Baseball’s alleged damages of millions of dollars.

Facts:

ESPN breached its 1996 telecasting agreement with Baseball when it preempted six games. Because Baseball received full payment from ESPN under the contract, it may only seek extra-contractual damages (consequential) stemming from the six preemptions. Baseball never provided a method of calculating its alleged damages.

Baseball’s Argument:

Baseball claims that it has been damaged in an amount “believed to exceed millions of dollars.”

Baseball attributes it damages to an alleged loss of:

(1) national television exposure;

(2) promotional opportunities and ratings;

(3) value of the “Sunday Night Baseball” television package;

(4) prestige

(5) potential sponsorships; and

(6) the future value of all of Baseball’s national telecast packages.

Espn’s Argument:

There is no factual basis to support any claim for monetary damages arising from the perceived injuries and that such claims are the product of speculation and guesswork.

Issue:

Can Baseball receive direct damages without giving evidence?

Holding:

NO. There is no doubt that Baseball has been damaged, but Baseball has not quantified those damages with any certainty. Therefore, when the plaintiff fails to prove damages with certainty, it is limited to only the recovery of nominal damages.

Rule: Plaintiff seeking compensatory damages has the burden of proof and should present to the court a proper basis for ascertaining the damages. They must be susceptible of ascertainment in some manner other than by mere conjecture or guesswork.