Leonard v. Pepsico, Inc.


Leonard v. Pepsico, Inc., 88 F. Supp. 2d 116,, aff'd 210 F.3d 88, more widely known as the Pepsi Points Case, is a contracts case tried in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in 1999, in which the plaintiff, John Leonard, sued PepsiCo, Inc. in an effort to enforce an "offer" to redeem 7,000,000 Pepsi Points for an AV-8 Harrier II jump jet which PepsiCo had shown in a portion of a televised commercial that PepsiCo argued was intended to be humorous.

Procedural history

The claim alleged both breach of contract and fraud. The case was originally brought in Florida, but eventually heard in New York. The defendant, Pepsi, moved for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. Among other claims made, Leonard claimed that a federal judge was incapable of deciding on the matter, and that instead the decision had to be made by a jury consisting of members of the "Pepsi Generation" to whom the advertisement would allegedly constitute an offer.

Facts

The court described the relevant portion of the televised commercial as follows:
The plaintiff did not collect 7,000,000 Pepsi Points through the purchase of Pepsi products, but instead sent a certified check for $700,008.50 as permitted by the contest rules. Leonard had 15 existing points, paid $0.10 a point for the remaining 6,999,985 points, and a $10 shipping and handling fee.

Judgment

The court, presided over by Judge Kimba Wood, rejected Leonard's claims and denied recovery on several grounds, including:
  1. It was found that the advertisement featuring the jet did not constitute an offer under the Restatement of Contracts.
  2. The court found that even if the advertisement had been an offer, no reasonable person could have believed that the company seriously intended to convey a jet worth roughly $23 million for $700,000, i.e., that it was mere puffery.
  3. The value of the alleged contract meant that it fell under the provisions of the Statute of Frauds, but the statute's requirement for written agreement between the parties was not fulfilled, so a contract had not been formed.
In justifying its conclusion that the commercial was "evidently done in jest" and that "The notion of traveling to school in a Harrier Jet is an exaggerated adolescent fantasy," the court made several observations regarding the nature and content of the commercial, including:
The court also stated that:
The decision was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which issued a brief, per curiam opinion concluding, "We affirm for substantially the reasons stated in Judge Wood's opinion".

Aftermath

Pepsi continued to air the commercial, but it updated the cost of the Harrier Jet to 700 million Pepsi Points and added a clarifying "Just Kidding" disclaimer.
The White House stated that the Harrier Jet would not be sold to civilians without "demilitarization," which, in the case of the Harrier, would have included stripping it of its ability to land and take off vertically.