Shokrian v. VF Corp. CA2/1
Filed 3/30/15 Shokrian v. VF Corp. CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
JONATHAN SHOKRIAN, B258205
Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. SC121572) v.
VF CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants and Respondents.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Craig D. Karlin, Judge. Affirmed. The Aftergood Law Firm and Aaron D. Aftergood for Plaintiff and Appellant. Loeb & Loeb, Mark D. Campbell, and Rachel A. Straus; Sidley Austin and Mark D. Campbell for Defendants and Respondents. _____________________________
Jonathan Shokrian appeals from an order staying this action on grounds of forum non conveniens. We conclude that Shokrian has not shown that the order constituted an abuse of discretion, and we therefore affirm. BACKGROUND1 Photographer Rony Alwin took a photograph of Shokrian at a private party. In 2010, Alwin licensed defendant VF Europe B.V.B.A. to use the photograph of Shokrian on “size tickets” of certain Lee brand “apparel and denim products.” In 2012, VF Europe began selling “Luke” jeans, a Lee jeans product. Affixed to the Luke jeans were “hang tags” bearing the image of Shokrian that Alwin had licensed to VF Europe. Luke jeans were sold only in Europe and the Middle East. In 2013, defendant VF Corporation (of which VF Europe is a wholly owned subsidiary) received “an attorney letter demanding that VF Corporation cease and desist the use of all hang tags with Shokrian’s image.” The letter was forwarded to VF Europe, which immediately removed the hang tags bearing Shokrian’s image from all Luke jeans in VF Europe’s warehouses, destroyed the remaining stock of hang tags bearing Shokrian’s image, and began producing hang tags for Luke jeans that did not bear Shokrian’s image. In October 2013, Shokrian filed suit in Los Angeles County Superior Court, alleging claims for common law and statutory invasion of privacy by commercial appropriation based on the allegedly unauthorized use of his image on the Luke jeans hang tags. His first amended complaint named VF Corporation, VF Jeanswear Sales, Inc., Lee Apparel Services, Inc., Lee Sales, Inc., Lee Jeans (“a business entity, form unknown”), VF Jeanswear Limited Partnership (collectively the “entity defendants”) and Alwin as defendants. VF Europe was not a defendant. On January 30, 2014, the entity defendants moved to stay or dismiss the action on grounds of forum non conveniens. The entity defendants, all of which are based in the United States, contended that they had nothing to do with the events at issue. Rather,
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)