Target Media Partners Operating Co. v. Specialty Mktg. Corp., 1091758.
Citation | 177 So.3d 843 |
Decision Date | 06 September 2013 |
Docket Number | 1091758. |
Parties | TARGET MEDIA PARTNERS OPERATING COMPANY, LLC, and Ed Leader v. SPECIALTY MARKETING CORPORATION d/b/a Truck Market News. |
Court | Supreme Court of Alabama |
Charles A. Dauphin and Donald R. James, Jr., of Baxley, Dillard, Dauphin, McKnight & James, Birmingham (rehearing brief filed by Joel E. Dillard and Donald R. James, Jr., of Baxley, Dillard, McKnight & James, Birmingham), for appellant.
J. Callen Sparrow, Christopher B. Hood, and Stephen D. Heninger of Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC, Birmingham, for appellee.
On Second Application for Rehearing
This Court's no-opinion order of affirmance of April 19, 2013, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Target Media Partners Operating Company, LLC ("Target Media"), and Specialty Marketing Corporation d/b/a Truck Market News ("Specialty Marketing"), both publishers of magazines directed to long-haul truck drivers and to the truck-driving industry, have litigated a commercial-contract dispute since 2007 in which each party alleged breach-of-contract claims against the other. Specialty Marketing, a plaintiff in the trial court, also alleged fraudulent-misrepresentation and promissory-fraud claims against Target Media and Ed Leader, Target Media's vice president of trucking, and sought punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages. The litigation culminated in a jury trial that lasted several days. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Specialty Marketing on its breach-of-contract and promissory-fraud claims against Target Media, in favor of Leader on the promissory-fraud claim against him, in favor of Specialty Marketing on its fraudulent-misrepresentation claim against Target Media and Leader, and in favor of Target Media on its breach-of-contract counterclaim against Specialty Marketing. Target Media and Leader appeal from that aspect of the judgment entered on the jury verdict in favor of Specialty Marketing on its claims against Target Media and Leader. Specialty Marketing does not appeal the judgment insofar as it found in favor of Target Media on Target Media's counterclaim. We affirm the trial court's order denying Target Media's and Leader's postjudgment motion, but we remand the cause to the trial court to review the punitive-damages award.
Target Media, which sometimes does business as "Target Distribution Partners" or "Target Media Partners," publishes a number of magazines that contain advertisements for items of interest to truck drivers and the trucking industry, such as driver recruitment and sales of commercial trucks and products used by truck drivers. It distributes the magazines nationally to truck stops, rest stops, and similar locations frequented by truck drivers. These magazines are free of charge. Target Media has a major distribution hub for these magazines in Oxford.
Specialty Marketing also publishes a free magazine directed to the truck-driving industry called Truck Market News that is published monthly and that contains advertisements for products such as new and used commercial trucks, parts, and trailers. Specialty Marketing distributes Truck Market News to many of the same locations where Target Media distributes its magazines. Specialty Marketing is a family business headquartered in Dallas, Texas, that has been in operation for over 35 years. It is run by Terry W. Davis and his sister, Kathleen Daniels, who have continued the business started by their father and who together own all the stock in Specialty Marketing.
In 2000, Target Media purchased two businesses in Calhoun County, Pollard Publishing and J.B. Scott, that published free magazines for distribution to truck drivers. Target Media then employed Gordon Adams and his brother Wallace Adams, both of whom had formerly worked for Pollard Publishing. After the purchases, Leader relocated to Oxford where, in addition to heading the trucking division of Target Media, he was also in charge of the distribution hub the company operated in Oxford.
In the fall of 2002, Jack Humphreville, Target Media's vice president of acquisitions, contacted Davis to discuss whether Davis and Daniels would be interested in selling Specialty Marketing to Target Media. When Davis and Daniels decided against selling Specialty Marketing, Davis and Humphreville began to discuss a business venture between the companies pursuant to which Target Media would distribute Truck Market News for Specialty Marketing. Davis testified that Humphreville told him he felt that Specialty Marketing could increase its advertising revenue by 20% annually if it used Target Media's distribution services. Humphreville put Davis in touch with Gordon Adams, who was at that time Target Media's distribution manager in Oxford, and Davis and Gordon Adams negotiated a contract they executed on November 21, 2002 ("the 2002 distribution contract"). However, Gordon Adams testified that he had to obtain the approval of Ed Leader, the vice president of trucking, of the terms of the 2002 distribution contract before it could be executed.
The contract stated:
The 2002 distribution contract was signed by Gordon Adams as "General Manager" of "Target Distribution Partners" and by Davis as the "Publisher" of "Truck Market News. " The parties subsequently agreed to adjust the total paid to Target Media per month by Specialty Marketing from $10,505 to $9,750.
The monthly delivery process under the 2002 distribution contract began when Trend Offset Printing ("Trend") in Dallas printed the magazines published by Target Media and Specialty Marketing. Trend printed between 36,000 and 42,000 copies of Truck Market News each month. Trend shipped most of Target Media's magazines and approximately 7,500 copies of Truck Market News to Target Media's Oxford facility. A certain number of both Target Media's magazines and Truck Market News were shipped directly from Trend to more than 60 terminals and warehouses operated by Con-way, Inc., nationwide for the delivery drivers' use in restocking along their routes. Davis himself picked up several hundred copies of Truck Market News and delivered those to small "mom-and-pop" truck stops in the area around Dallas that were not covered by Target Media's delivery routes. The remainder of Target Media's magazines and Truck Market News remained at Trend for route delivery. Target Media contracted with an independent driver in...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Farmers Ins. Exch. v. Morris
...for a remittitur of the punitive-damages award. This Court addressed a similar argument in Target Media Partners–Operating Co. v. Specialty Marketing Corp., 177 So.3d 843, 869–70 (Ala.2013), as follows:" Section 6–11–23(b), Ala.Code 1975, states:" ‘In all cases wherein a verdict for punitiv......
-
Ala. River Grp., Inc. v. Conecuh Timber, Inc.
...and promissory fraud where the record below supported each claim. See, e.g., Target Media Partners Operating Co. v. Specialty Mktg. Corp., 177 So.3d 843, 868–69 (Ala. 2013) (plurality opinion) (affirming the submission to a jury of claims of fraudulent misrepresentation and promissory fraud......
-
Garber v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.
...Alabama law). Yet, “[c]ircumstantial evidence can be used to establish an intent not to perform and an intent to deceive.” Target Media, 177 So.3d at 867. As discussed subsequent pages of text, the pleadings reasonably indicate that Nationwide offered a policy designed to insure against tra......
-
Target Media Partners v. Specialty Mktg. Corp.
...advertisements of interest to members of the truck driving industry. Target Media Partners Operating Co., LLC v. Specialty Mktg. Corp. , 177 So.3d 843, 848 (Ala. 2013). In addition to publishing magazines, Target Media distributes publications to locations concentrated in the southeastern U......
-
Post-judgment Review of Punitive Damages
...on a motion for new trial), it is error to deny or to fail to hold a hearing. See Target Media Partners Op. Co. v. Specialty Mktg. Co., 177 So. 3d 843, 869-71 (Ala. 2013); Southeast Envtl. Infrastructure, LLC v. Rivers, 12 So. 3d 32, 50 (Ala. 2008). Section 6-11-23(b) also states that "[a]n......