Judge eliminates $53 million in punitive damages for T.I. and Tiny over OMG dolls
The order lets stand the jury's $17.8 million damages award and liability findings but vacates the punitive award for a new trial or a $1 remittitur.
A federal judge has eliminated a jury’s $53.6 million punitive damages award in hip-hop moguls Clifford “T.I.” and Tameka “Tiny” Harris’ lawsuit against the maker of one of the most popular dolls in the world.
MGA Entertainment still owes $17.8 million for trade dress infringement and likeness misappropriation related to 15 L.O.L. Surprise! OMG Dolls, but Senior U.S. District Judge James V. Selna said there’s not enough evidence “to show willfulness of intent” by MGA against Tiny Harris’ daughter Zonnique Pullins’ group the OMG Girlz.
“[W]hen it came to the OMG Girlz, there was no reliable evidence that MGA had any knowledge of the group’s trade dress or desire to use their likeness to create the infringing dolls,” according to the 33-page order. “The strong appearance that MGA copied other celebrities does not provide clear and convincing evidence that such was the case for the OMG Girlz.”
The order ends litigation over the case’s third trial and sets the stage for a fourth trial over punitive damages. Selna rejected a new trial for MGA on the infringement and misappropriation claims for which the jury awarded the $17.8 million damages award.
MGA’s lawyers declined to comment on Friday.
The Harrises’ lawyers rejected the $1 remittitur in a filing on Thursday and said they’ll “attempt to meet and confer with counsel for MGA and file a proposed briefing schedule for the structure of the new trial on punitive damages.”
The couple said in a statement that the lawsuit “shows just how hard it is for creatives, especially Black artists and young entrepreneurs, to protect their intellectual property from billion-dollar corporations.”
“A jury heard weeks of testimony, saw the willful and malicious conduct of MGA, and awarded $71 million in disgorgement of profits and punitive damages. Obviously, we are disappointed that the district court is requiring a new trial on the punitive damages, and thereby reducing the current award to $17.8 million. We are considering options as to next steps—but if in the end there is another mini-trial on just the punitive damages, we expect another jury will be similarly offended by MGA’s maliciousness and copying,” according to the statement.
The jury in the first trial never reached a verdict because Judge Selna declared a mistrial in January 2023 after jurors mistakenly heard deposition testimony from a woman who said she stopped buying the OMG dolls because, “I did not want to support a company that steals from African Americans and their ideas.” The judge had prohibited testimony about cultural misappropriation and racism.
Jurors in the second trial in May 2023 sided with MGA on all claims, and they asked if they could order them to pay the company’s attorney fees. Their verdict didn’t stand, however, because of a U.S. Supreme Court order issued after trial that said a dog toy modeled off a Jack Daniel’s whiskey bottle doesn’t deserve added protection under the First Amendment.
The ruling contradicted Judge Selna’s instruction to jurors in the MGA trial that the company’s dolls are an expressive work worthy of First Amendment protection.
The judge ordered a new trial, and the Harrises’ lawyers at Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP narrowed their case to argue that only seven of the 32 OMG dolls misappropriated the OMG Girlz’s likeness, name or identity and infringed the group’s trade dress of vibrant hair color, experimental and urban outfits and the name OMG Girlz.
The jury ruled in their favor on all seven, but they also went further and found that six additional dolls infringed the trade dress and misappropriated the likeness, name or identity, and that one doll only infringed the trade dress and another only misappropriated the OMG Girlz’s name, likeness or identity.
The L.O.L. Surprise dolls were first released in 2019 and are among the most purchased toys in the world.
The jury’s actual damages award of $17,872,253 matched the profits for the first seven dolls. The punitive award of $53,616,759 is exactly three times the actual damages award.
Considering “post-trial equitable issues,” Judge Selna, a 2003 George W. Bush appointee, initially said he wouldn’t adopt the jury’s punitive damages award, but he changed his mind and issued the final judgment on April 30 for $71,489,012, with interest compounded annually at 3.972 percent beginning April 15, 2025.
The case didn’t end there, however, because MGA’s lawyers moved for a judgment in the company’s favor or a new trial or remittitur, which is when a judge reduces a jury’s damages award.
Their 34-page motion said the “staggering amount of the punitive damages award” violates due process, but even if it didn’t, it can’t stand because no evidence supports the argument that MGA acted willfully. They also said California law says if jurors don’t find compensatory damages, they can’t award punitive damages, and the jury’s $17.8 million damages award against MGA doesn’t qualify.
“Here, there were zero compensatory damages for actual harm. The Court should thus find that punitive damages are unavailable as a matter of law and modify the verdict to eliminate the legally erroneous punitive damages award,” according to the motion Mark Finkelstein and Ellen Kim of Umberg Zipser LLP in Irvine and Paul Loh, Jason H. Wilson, Kenneth M. Trujillo-Jamison and Breeanna N. Brewer of Willenken LLP in Los Angeles.
The Harrises’ lawyers opposed in a 31-page filing that said the punitive damages award is adequately supported by evidence of willful conduct, including an email exchange between MGA employees mistaking an OMG Girlz reference as a reference to the OMG dolls.
Lead attorney John Keville argued during trial that MGA styled some dolls on outfits worn by Zonnique and OMG Girlz members Bahja Rodriguez and Breaunna Womack, including during a 2017 New Year’s Eve performance in Atlanta.
Judge Selna heard oral argument during a 43-minute hearing on June 30 at the Ronald Reagan U.S. Courthouse in Santa Ana, then issued his final ruling on July 8. He declined to vacate the jury’s liability findings against MGA or its initial $17.8 million damages verdict, but he agreed with MGA that no evidence of willful conduct supports the $53 million punitive damages award.
He said MGA witnesses “lost credibility” when they denied copying other celebrities, including when Blanche Consorti denied that a doll called Piano King copied Elton John and that a doll called Shimone Queen copied Michael Jackson.
“However, the Court still finds that while this evidence is the strongest evidence of willfulness or intent advanced by the Harrises, it falls short of clear and convincing,” according to the order.
The judge said the harm suffered by the Harrises “was predominantly economic in nature, leaning against reprehensibility.” He also said there “is no evidence in the record to suggest that MGA acted with indifference or reckless disregard to the health or safety of others,” and he rejected the Harrises’ argument that the company preyed on them because they were financially vulnerable.
“The trial record shows that the Harrises were not financially vulnerable,” Selna wrote, quoting T.I.’s testimony in trial “I already have money” and that he’s not here for a “big money grab.”
He also said MGA’s continued release of infringing dolls after the Harrises complained is not evidence of willfullness Nor does the release of more infringing dolls support a finding of willfulness because “the release of these dolls is equally explained by [CEO Isaac] Larian and MGA’s conviction that it was not infringing on the trade dress because of the reasonable dissimilarities in the dolls.”
MGA’s lawyers argued a new trial regarding punitives wasn’t warranted “given the protracted nature of this litigation and in the interest of judicial economy,” and there’s no reason to believe the Harrises could introduce different evidence on punitive damages at a fourth trial.”
Selna’s order, however, gives the Harrises the option of a new trial to determine punitive damages, or of accepting a remitter that reduces punitives to $1.
Court documents:
April 15 ruling on motion for judgment
July 8 order on punitive damages
June 16 MGA’s reply
June 5 Harrises’ opposition
May 27 MGA’s motion for judgment or new trial
Previous articles:
May 27, 2023: Jury finds in favor of toymaker MGA in trial with T.I. and Tiny Harris over OMG Girlz, OMG dolls
May 26, 2023: 'Extremely disturbed': Judge calls out MGA's lawyers for accusations against T.I.'s lawyers
May 22, 2023: Doll designer breaks down after cross-exam about 'lingerie-gate', Marilyn Manson's Nazi cap
May 18, 2023: ‘Humor, sarcasm and satire’: Rapper T.I. testifies in civil infringement trial over dolls, OMG Girlz
May 15, 2023: Racial issues still lurk in toymaker’s new trial with T.I. and Tiny Harris over OMG Girlz and dolls
Diddy trial judge wants info on similar sentencings
U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian in the Southern District of New York knows he has a lot on his plate with the sentencing of Sean “Diddy” Combs.
To prepare, he wants attorneys to find cases like Combs’ where offense levels were calculated based on transportation to engage in prostitution, and the defendant was in the lowest criminal history under the U.S. Sentencing Commission guidelines. He hopes prosecutors and the defense can submit a joint letter, and he wants it by Sept. 1.
Combs’ sentencing is scheduled for Oct. 3, and my previous article looks at the new argument prosecutors appear ready to advance under a recent amendment to the sentencing guidelines that prohibits sentences from considering acquitted conduct.
I discussed this and more with attorney Mark Geragos, whose daughter Teny Geragos represented Combs in trial. The full interview is on my YouTube channel.
Thank you for supporting my independent legal affairs journalism. Your paid subscriptions make my work possible. If you’re not already a paid subscriber, please consider purchasing a subscription through Substack. You also can support me through my merchandise store and by watching my YouTube channel. Thank you!