Waits

Waits v. Frito-Lay, Inc.

Good Law
978 F.3d 1093
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 5, 1992No. 90-55981California10,362 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Boochever, J.

ORDER

The opinion in the above-entitled case, No. 90-55981, slip op. 9429 (9th Cir. Aug. 5, 1992), is amended by deleting footnote 4 on page 9449, and substituting in its place the following:

With this amendment the panel has voted to deny the petition for rehearing. Judges Browning and Reinhardt reject the suggestion for rehearing en banc and Judge Booc-hever recommends rejection of the suggestion for rehearing en banc.

The full court has been advised of the suggestion 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 is denied and the suggestion for rehearing en banc is rejected.

OPINION

Defendants Frito-Lay, Inc., and Tracy-Locke, Inc., appeal a jury verdict and award of $2.6 million in compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees, in favor of singer Tom Waits. Waits sued the snack food manufacturer and its advertising agency for voice misappropriation and false endorsement following the broadcast of a radio commercial for SalsaR-io Doritos which featured a vocal performance imitating Waits’ raspy singing voice. On appeal, the defendants mount attacks on…

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.