Tamara Wareka v. Trusper Inc.
- Vince Chhabria
- 3:21-cv-02682
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Wareka v. Trusper, Judge Chhabria granted Trusper summary judgment, ruling Wareka’s lawsuit breached a settlement agreement and rejecting her copyright claim.
Tamara Wareka’s settlement-agreement and copyright claims against Trusper were resolved against her on summary judgment. Trusper prevailed on its settlement-agreement claim and may recover reasonable attorney’s fees as breach-related damages, with the amount to be determined later.
What happened
In Tamara Wareka v. Trusper Inc., Wareka sued Trusper after Trusper posted material on its social-media channels. Trusper argued that Wareka’s lawsuit violated a settlement agreement involving Mai Couture.
Wareka argued that factual disputes existed because Mai denied creating the posts or providing the photograph to Trusper. The settlement agreement covered the parties and people acting together with them or under their direction or control.
Judge Vince Chhabria ruled that the disputes were not important to the outcome because Trusper acted together with Mai by promoting Mai’s products on Trusper’s social-media channels. He granted Trusper’s motion for summary judgment on its settlement-agreement claim and on Wareka’s copyright claim. The court also stated that Trusper could recover reasonable attorney’s fees as damages for the breach, with the amount to be addressed later.
The detailed version
- Tamara Wareka v. Trusper Inc. · No. 3:21-cv-02682
- Vince Chhabria
- Feb. 8, 2023
Background
The court granted Trusper Inc.’s motion for summary judgment. Summary judgment is a decision made without a trial when the court determines that no genuine dispute over an outcome-changing fact requires a jury’s decision. The opinion states that Trusper was entitled to judgment on its claim that Wareka breached a settlement agreement with Mai Couture by suing Trusper. The court also granted summary judgment to Trusper on Wareka’s copyright claim.
Settlement Agreement
The settlement agreement stated that it benefited and bound the parties, as well as people acting together or participating with them, or acting under their direction or control. Mai denied creating the posts at issue or providing the photograph to Trusper. Wareka argued that these denials created factual disputes that prevented summary judgment.
The court said that, even assuming those disputes were genuine, they were not material—meaning they would not change the result. The court reasoned that even if Trusper independently obtained the photograph and posted it on its own social-media channels, no reasonable jury could conclude that Trusper was not acting together with Mai. The services agreement between Trusper and Mai contemplated promoting Mai’s products on Trusper’s social-media channels, and the posts on Trusper’s Instagram and Facebook accounts promoted those products. The court therefore found no genuine dispute about whether the settlement agreement’s release protected Trusper.
Copyright Claim and Damages
For the same reason, the court granted Trusper summary judgment on Wareka’s copyright claim. The court also stated, based on an earlier ruling, that Trusper would be entitled to recover compensatory damages in the form of reasonable attorney’s fees incurred because of the breach. A case-management conference was scheduled for March 8, 2023, to discuss how to determine the amount of those damages.
The court noted that Trusper might also qualify for attorney’s fees under the Copyright Act, but indicated that such a request would presumably be decided, if necessary, after entry of a final judgment. The order was signed by United States District Judge Vince Chhabria on February 8, 2023.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.