Pepsi Points Harrier Fighter TV Commercial Soda Soft Drink March 1996 Court Case Lawsuit Free

Описание: Leonard v. Pepsico, Inc., 88 F. Supp. 2d 116 (S.D.N.Y. 1999), later affirmed by the Second Circuit in 210 F.3d 88 (2000) and commonly referred to as the Pepsi Points case, is a notable American contract law decision focused on offer and acceptance. The litigation, initially filed in Florida and subsequently heard in New York, was presided over by Judge Kimba Wood.

In 1996, PepsiCo launched a promotional loyalty program in which customers earned Pepsi Points by purchasing Pepsi products, with these points exchangeable for physical items. One television commercial for the program depicted a character traveling to school in a McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II jet valued at approximately $37.4 million, available for 7,000,000 Pepsi Points. John Leonard, the plaintiff, observed that Pepsi also allowed customers to directly purchase points at 10¢ each. Capitalizing on this detail, Leonard submitted a check for $700,008.50 (including shipping and handling) along with 15 promotional labels, attempting to redeem the jet. PepsiCo rejected the offer, arguing that the commercial was intended as a humorous exaggeration.

Leonard’s claims, which included allegations of breach of contract and fraud, contended that the advertisement constituted a genuine offer. He further argued that, because the alleged contract involved significant value, the case should have been decided by a jury drawn from the "Pepsi Generation" rather than a federal judge. However, Judge Wood dismissed these claims on several grounds:

The commercial did not amount to a bona fide offer under the Restatement (Second) of Contracts.
No reasonable person could have interpreted the ad as a serious intent to offer a fighter jet valued at around $37.4 million for $700,000; it was deemed mere puffery.
Due to its high value, the transaction would have needed a written agreement under the Statute of Frauds, a requirement that was not met.

Judge Wood described the commercial as "evidently done in jest" and noted that the portrayal of a youth piloting a fighter jet to school was an unrealistic and exaggerated fantasy. Specific observations included that the inexperienced teen in the ad would be unqualified to operate such a complex aircraft and that no school would accommodate the logistical challenges of a fighter jet landing on its grounds. Additionally, the court underscored that, given the Harrier jet’s military functions, its depiction as an everyday mode of transportation was clearly facetious.

On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district court's decision for the reasons outlined by Judge Wood. Since PepsiCo never cashed Leonard’s check, the fraud claim did not proceed. Following the incident, Pepsi continued to run the commercial but revised the jet’s cost to 700 million Pepsi Points and included a "Just Kidding" disclaimer. The Pentagon also confirmed that the Harrier jet could not be sold to civilians without significant modifications, such as removing its vertical takeoff and landing capabilities.

In November 2022, the case was revisited in a Netflix docuseries titled "Pepsi, Where's My Jet?".

Television commercial:
© PepsiCo, Inc.
https://www.pepsi.com/
Posted for entertainment and educational purposes only.

#pepsi #pepsicola #PepsiCommercial #VintagePepsi #dietpepsi #Pepsipoints #girlfriend #michaeljfox #soda #softdrink #fountaindrink #televisioncommercial #tvspot #1990sCommercials #90scommercials #tvcommercial #cowmissing