Leonard v. PepsiCo, Inc., 210 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 2000)
Case 6.3 Leonard v. PepsiCo, Inc., 210 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 2000)
The cases are assigned based on what team you are in so that cases are distributed evenly. Each student will treat this as an individual assignment (you do not need to meet with your team). Your response should be well rounded and analytical and should not just provide a conclusion or an opinion without explaining the reason for the choice.
The assignment should be submitted as a PowerPoint and should include the following slides (some questions may take more than 1 slide):
• Parties [Identify the plaintiff and the defendant]
• Facts [Summarize only those facts critical to the outcome of the case]
• Procedure [What was the outcome in the lower court(s)? Who brought the appeal?]
• Issue [Note the central question or questions on which the case turns]
• Explain the applicable law(s). Do some research on the laws cited in the case.
• Holding [How did the court resolve the issue(s)? Who won?]
• Reasoning [Explain the logic that supported the court's decision]
• Legal Research [Report something you have discovered about the case, parties, or other important elements from your own research]
• Conclusion [Summarize the key aspects of the decision and your recommendations on the court's ruling]
• References [Use APA style for your citations and references]
Title: Analyzing Leonard v. PepsiCo, Inc.
Parties
- Plaintiff: John Leonard
- Defendant: PepsiCo, Inc.
Facts
- Leonard received a letter stating he had won a Harrier Jet from Pepsi's "Pepsi Points" promotion.
- The jet was listed in the promotional material for 7 million Pepsi Points.
- Leonard accumulated 15 points and attempted to claim the jet.
- Pepsi claimed the jet was a joke and refused to deliver it.
Procedure
- Lower Court Outcome: Ruled in favor of PepsiCo, dismissing Leonard's claim.
- Appeal: Leonard brought the appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
Issue
- The central question: Whether the advertisement for the Harrier Jet constituted an offer under contract law.
Applicable Law
- Contract Law: Offer, acceptance, consideration, and intention to create legal relations are essential elements of a contract.
- Advertisement Law: Advertisements are generally considered invitations to treat rather than offers.
Holding
- The court ruled in favor of PepsiCo, stating that the advertisement for the Harrier Jet was not a valid offer but an obvious joke, and thus Leonard was not entitled to the jet.
Reasoning
- The court based its decision on the fact that no reasonable person would interpret the advertisement as a serious offer due to the absurdity of offering a military jet for Pepsi Points.
- The commercial context and tone of the promotion suggested it was a humorous and exaggerated marketing campaign.
Legal Research
- Additional research reveals that this case sparked discussions on the distinction between advertisements as offers or invitations to treat in contract law.
Conclusion
- In conclusion, the court rightly decided that the advertisement did not constitute a valid offer, and PepsiCo was not obligated to provide Leonard with the Harrier Jet.
- It serves as a reminder for companies to be cautious with their marketing campaigns to avoid potential legal disputes.
References
- Leonard v. PepsiCo, Inc., 210 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 2000)
- Relevant Contract Law and Advertisement Law sources according to APA style guidelines.