669 F. App'x 17
2d Cir.2016Background
- Plaintiff Justin D. Bihag appeared on the reality TV program "Dog the Bounty Hunter" from 2004–2009 and received at least $28,000 for his appearances.
- Bihag signed written releases that expressly waived "any and all claims" arising out of his appearance or participation in the Program, including privacy, defamation, misrepresentation, and other causes of action.
- The release included an acknowledgment that he read, understood, and voluntarily signed, and that he received "good and valuable consideration."
- Bihag sued alleging breach of contract (and other claims), but he did not pursue several claims on appeal (promissory estoppel, unjust enrichment, breach of covenant, misappropriation, negligent misrepresentation, fraud).
- The District Court dismissed Bihag’s breach-of-contract claim; he appealed to the Second Circuit, which reviewed the dismissal de novo.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the signed releases bar Bihag’s claims | Release language does not manifest intent to waive right to sue or is ambiguous | Releases are broad, clear, and cover "any and all claims" arising from participation | Releases unambiguous and enforceable; they bar Bihag's claims |
| Whether the releases were voluntary and supported by consideration | Implied challenge to scope; did not dispute voluntariness | Releases were voluntary and supported by consideration (payments) | Bihag acknowledged voluntariness and receipt of consideration; enforceable |
| Whether ambiguity in contract language requires refusal to enforce release | Argues terms could bear multiple meanings | Terms are plain and expansive, covering all program-related claims | Court finds no ambiguity; interpretation is a question of law and release is clear |
| Whether alternative grounds (statute of limitations) justify affirmance | N/A on appeal | Defendants argued statute of limitations would independently bar claims | Court did not reach statute-of-limitations argument because releases dispositive |
Key Cases Cited
- Albany Sav. Bank, FSB v. Halpin, 117 F.3d 669 (2d Cir. 1997) (general releases governed by contract principles)
- Mangini v. McClurg, 24 N.Y.2d 556 (N.Y. 1969) (principles on releases under New York law)
- Seiden Assocs., Inc. v. ANC Holdings, Inc., 959 F.2d 425 (2d Cir. 1992) (review of contract ambiguity is question of law)
- Eternity Glob. Master Fund Ltd. v. Morgan Guar. Trust Co. of N.Y., 375 F.3d 168 (2d Cir. 2004) (definition of contractual ambiguity standard)
- Norton v. Sam's Club, 145 F.3d 114 (2d Cir. 1998) (issues not sufficiently argued on appeal are waived)
- Guippone v. BH S&B Holdings LLC, 737 F.3d 221 (2d Cir. 2013) (de novo review of dismissal)