As the billionaire media mogul looked on, jurors heard attorneys sum up their cases in digestible soundbites each accusing the other of dishonesty and breaching a 2013 deal to roll out the Gold Jay-Z cologne and related products.
Jay-Z counsel framed the case as a misunderstanding exacerbated by dishonest deal brokers, while Parlux Fragrances LLC countered that the defense was "engaged in smoke and mirrors distraction" from the fact that Jay-Z simply "disapproved and disappeared" when he couldn't get what he wanted and destroyed evidence when Parlux sued.
"It all devolved into one big misunderstanding. That's what this case is," said Jay-Z counsel Alex Spiro of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP. Spiro added that Parlux was the first to breach the contract by failing to give Jay-Z a solid plan for him to approve.
He argued that testimony from Rene Garcia, the liaison between Jay-Z and Parlux, shouldn't be trusted because he hid information from both sides, ultimately leading to the litigation in the case. Diana Espino, who testified in Parlux's case for a week, should also be treated skeptically, Spiro said.
"Rene was the straw that stirred the margarita drink," Spiro added coyly, alluding to a series of text messages featuring heart emojis sent by Parlux chairman Stephen Nussdorf asking Espino out for drinks while she was still under oath.
Spiro also attacked Espino's testimony that Jay-Z approved a promotional photo, which would trigger additional obligations on his part. "There's not one shred of credible evidence that he approved anything at that meeting," Spiro said, taking aim at the particular phrase they said Jay-Z chose to signal his approval. "'I ain't mad at it' is not an approval, and they know that."
Appealing to the jury's logic, Spiro argued that it makes little sense for Jay-Z to hurt the only product that he had chosen to carry his name. "Why on earth would Jay-Z put his name on one product and one product only ... and want that product to fail?" Spiro asked.
In any case, Jay-Z is still owed millions in royalties for the so-called Extreme follow-on fragrance that he claims was sold without his approval, Spiro told the jury.
Throughout trial, Parlux paraded a series of its own current or former executives decrying Jay-Z's alleged failure to work with them to promote the product resulting in millions in lost profits. Parlux then called Jay-Z to the stand where he sparred with Parlux counsel Anthony Viola of Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC, repeatedly correcting the attorney and suggesting that he was misleading the jury with his "little lawyer tricks," repeatedly drawing laughter from the jury.
Jay-Z and his attorneys pushed back, arguing to the jury that Parlux failed to understand how to properly market his luxury brand and protect his personal brand from being sold "on the shelves of Walmart between hand sanitizer and Tic Tacs."
Jay-Z's counsel said his decision not to participate in select promotion events was due to conflicts with his tour schedule or other concerns, such as a racial profiling scandal at Macy's and Barney's that supported his decision not to promote his line in person at the launch date.
The suit was first filed in January 2016 by Parlux and its parent, Perfumania Holdings Inc., with allegations that Jay-Z and his company, S. Carter Enterprises LLC, breached his contractual obligations to promote the Gold Jay-Z cologne. Jay-Z countersued, claiming he was still owed more than $2.7 million under the deal in royalties.
Parlux responded to Jay-Z's summations by saying much of what the businessman's case focuses on are distractions from the underlying contract issues that the case is really about, repeatedly hammering the court's finding that the music titan destroyed email evidence.
"When they couldn't get what they wanted, they constantly threw sand in the gears of what Parlux was trying to do," Viola said.
Viola pointed to Jay-Z's decision to stay home with his family on the launch day — the day after Thanksgiving — instead of doing three hours of promotional events in Manhattan as evidence of a breach of contract. He spun Jay-Z's own testimony on the stand, that he was "on trial for something I didn't do," to make his point.
"He's right. We have him on trial because he didn't do anything," Viola said. Jay-Z "couldn't be bothered to go from Hudson Street to Times Square."
And while Jay-Z testified that he's "not a lawyer" and did not read the contract, the document he signed dictated that he would make every reasonable attempt to make promotional appearances. No, it didn't specify he had to show up for the launch date exactly, Viola noted, but, "the parties agreed to a process. The process had to be upheld."
"The process says you cannot disapprove and disappear," Viola said. "That's what the defendants did."
Turning to the so-called flankers, or follow-up fragrances, Viola said that Jay-Z brushed off Parlux's attempts to meet with him and help promote them. "They couldn't find a legal way out of this contract, so they decided to slow roll Parlux to death for the next year," Viola argued.
Jay-Z and his company "never had a real intention of engaging with flankers," Viola said. "It was all baloney."
In the end, Viola asked the jury to award Parlux a total of $67.6 million in damages, arguing that had Jay-Z not violated the contract, "Parlux would have had a runaway success and would have netted $67.6 million in net profits."
The six jurors and three alternates appeared to struggle with the length of the trial, which was often held up by bench conferences and strident objections from both sides. Jurors sighed and shook their heads as they were repeatedly ushered in and out of the courtroom. One juror briefly dozed off during summations on Tuesday until a court officer shook him.
Six different jurors and alternates even used their cellphones, smartwatches, or a tablet in the courtroom — a violation of court rules, a state court spokesman confirmed — at various times when the final witness was on the stand Tuesday. At one point during closing arguments, five jurors and alternates pulled out their devices all at once during a brief pause in the proceedings.
New York State Supreme Court Justice Andrew Borrok noticed an alternate juror on her phone and a court officer walked over to admonish her. She muttered as he walked away and took out the device again as soon as the officer returned to the front of the courtroom.
The judge said he would instruct the jury on the law Wednesday morning and turn over a verdict sheet for them to consider. One juror clapped at the news.
Jay-Z appeared pleased with Spiro's performance on Tuesday, giving him a quick embrace at the defense table. Jay-Z declined to comment further as he left the courthouse.
Parlux Fragrances is represented by Anthony J. Viola, Andre K. Cizmarik, Kara M. Cormier and Whitney M. Costin of Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC.
Jay-Z and his company are represented by Alex Spiro, Ellyde R. Thompson, Cory D. Struble, Allison L. McGuire and Phillip B. Jobe of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP.
The case is Parlux Fragrances LLC et al. v. S. Carter Enterprises LLC et al., case number 650403/2016, in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York.
--Editing by Jay Jackson Jr.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
