Hilton

Hilton v. Hallmark Cards

Good Law
599 F.3d 894·2010 WL 1039872·38 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1753·96 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1177·2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 6103
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 23, 201008-55443California7,880 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Scannlain, J.

ORDER

The opinion filed in this case on August 31, 2009, and reported at 580 F.3d 874 , is hereby amended. An amended opinion is filed concurrently with this order. With this amendment, the panel has unanimously voted to deny the petition for rehearing. Judges O’Scannlain and Graber have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc, and Judge Noonan so recommends. The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no active judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R.App. P. 35.

The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED. No subsequent petitions for rehearing and rehearing en banc may be filed.

OPINION

We must decide whether California law allows a celebrity to sue a greeting card company for using her image and catchphrase in a birthday card without her permission.

I

Paris Hilton is a controversial celebrity known for her lifestyle as a flamboyant heiress. As the saying goes, she is “famous for being famous.”

She is also famous for starring in “The Simple Life,” a so-called reality television program. The show places her and fellow heiress Nicole Ritchie in situations for which, the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.