NEW YORK — A New York judge ruled Friday that Snow Joe LLC’s breach of contract lawsuit against Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, LP (MSLO) will proceed, rejecting the media company’s attempt to dismiss key claims. The ruling comes after Snow Joe alleged MSLO failed to honor its marketing obligations, including Stewart’s promotion of its products.
Judge Andrea Masley of the New York County Supreme Court determined that Snow Joe provided enough evidence to support its claim that MSLO breached its licensing agreement. However, the court dismissed Snow Joe’s fraud-related claims, finding they lacked a legal basis.
A Licensing Deal Gone Wrong
In 2018, Snow Joe entered a licensing agreement with MSLO to use the “Martha Stewart” and “Martha Stewart Everyday” trademarks. The deal, which included marketing and promotional support, was designed to boost Snow Joe’s sales. According to the lawsuit, MSLO and Stewart failed to provide that support and actively promoted competitors.
Snow Joe argued that Stewart’s involvement was a key factor in signing the agreement. Under the contract, MSLO was expected to ensure Stewart promoted Snow Joe’s products through social media, public appearances, and marketing events. The company alleged MSLO failed to uphold these terms, resulting in financial losses.
MSLO denied wrongdoing and argued that Snow Joe failed to fulfill its own obligations under the deal. The company also claimed that Stewart’s failure to participate did not constitute a breach, citing contractual language that shielded MSLO from liability.
Court Upholds Breach of Contract Claim
The judge sided with Snow Joe on its contract claim, ruling that MSLO had a clear obligation to use “reasonable efforts” to secure Stewart’s marketing participation. The decision allows Snow Joe to proceed with its lawsuit, which seeks at least $5 million in damages.
“This ruling affirms that contractual obligations must be honored,” legal experts said following the decision. “Even if a party retains some discretion, they still must act in good faith.”
MSLO sought to dismiss the case, arguing that its marketing responsibilities were limited. The court rejected this argument, stating that the company was required to genuinely support Snow Joe’s brand.
Fraud Allegations Dismissed
While Snow Joe’s breach of contract claim survived, the court dismissed its fraud and fraudulent inducement claims. The judge ruled that Snow Joe failed to provide evidence of any false promises beyond the contract itself.
For a fraud claim to stand, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant knowingly made false statements outside of the contract to secure the deal. The court found that Snow Joe failed to meet this threshold and that its fraud claim merely duplicated the breach of contract allegations.
Additionally, the judge dismissed Snow Joe’s bad faith claim, ruling that it was unnecessary since the company had already established a valid breach of contract case.
What Happens Next?
Both sides must now submit a proposed case schedule within 25 days. If they cannot agree, they must present competing proposals to the court. The case will then move into the discovery phase, during which Snow Joe will attempt to gather evidence of MSLO’s alleged breach.
The lawsuit underscores the importance of clear marketing commitments in celebrity-backed licensing deals. Legal analysts say the case could set a precedent for courts interpreting “reasonable efforts” clauses in endorsement contracts.
Neither Snow Joe nor MSLO responded to requests for comment.
This case remains ongoing.
ALSO READ: Stock Market Plunge
For the Rockland Daily News, I cover the arts, music, theater, nightlife, pop culture, TV, film, food and food trends, and interesting people in New York. I write two weekly columns, one about bands and one about weekend events, and I sometimes write features about (but not limited to) local history and social issues, placing both in broader contexts. My beat is generally statewide, though I tend to focus more on the Rockland County and East Coast areas.