Starline Tours of Hollywood, Inc. vs. Big Bus Tours Los Angeles, Inc., et al.

Case Background

On October 11, 2019, Starline Tours of Hollywood, Inc. filed a business interference lawsuit against Big Bus L.A. Inc. and Open Top Sightseeing USA alleging unfair competition and interference with contracts.

The case was filed in the California Superior Court, Los Angeles County. Judges Michael P. Linfield and Barbara M. Scheper presided over this lawsuit. [Case number: 19STCV36480]

Cause

Starline Tours of Hollywood, Inc. (“Plaintiff” or “Starline”) was a California corporation headquartered in Los Angeles. Starline, one of the oldest and most respected sightseeing tour companies in the city, alleged that Defendant Big Bus L.A. entered the Los Angeles tour market in 2019. After obtaining a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), Big Bus L.A. began operating as a competing tour bus company in Los Angeles, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, Hollywood, Marina Del Rey, and Venice Beach.

Starline claimed that Big Bus L.A. was controlled by Defendant Open Top Sightseeing USA, which reported significant financial backing to the CPUC, including $90 million in revenue and $45 million in assets. This financial support allowed Big Bus L.A. to launch with 18 double-decker buses and 4 vans. Starline alleged that Open Top directed and financed Big Bus L.A.’s operations, including its unlawful conduct.

Starline further asserted that Big Bus L.A. copied its business methods, operating in the same cities and offering similar services. Plaintiff accused Big Bus L.A. of engaging in fraudulent and illegal activities to harm Starline, including stealing customers, employees, and revenue through illegal ticket sales. These activities allegedly included selling tickets on the Hollywood Walk of Fame to divert customers, falsely advertising prices, and engaging in predatory tactics such as parking large buses near Starline’s business to damage its operations. Additionally, Big Bus L.A. allegedly interfered with Starline’s contracts, trespassed in its parking areas, and disrupted its relationships with vendors and employees.

Damages

The Plaintiff sought over $10 million in damages, including compensatory, punitive, and incidental amounts, along with attorneys’ fees, court costs, specific performance, injunctive relief, and any other remedies deemed appropriate by the Court.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Starline Tours of Hollywood, Inc.
    • Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Mohammed K. Ghods | Jeremy A. Rhyne
  • Defendant(s): Big Bus Tours Los Angeles, Inc. | Open Top Sightseeing USA
    • Counsel for Defendant(s): Brian Katz | Joseph Weiner |Peter Sartorius | G. Cress Templeton

Claims

First Cause of Action: Unfair Competition (Against All Defendants)

Plaintiff accused the Defendants of engaging in unfair competition. Big Bus LA, operating under a license from the CPUC, had set fare limits but violated them by selling tickets below the minimum allowed price. Defendants were found to have advertised these discounted tickets both online and on the street, misleading customers. This violated the California Business and Professions Code, which prohibits false advertising and selling below cost. Plaintiff argued that Big Bus LA’s actions were unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent, harming both consumers and competitors.

Second Cause of Action: Intentional Interference with Contract (Against All Defendants)

Plaintiff had exclusive contracts with vendors, including LPG, to offer Starline’s tours on their Go Card system. Defendants knowingly induced LPG to breach this contract by including Big Bus LA’s tours. Additionally, Defendants targeted Starline’s employees by soliciting them to leave for Big Bus LA. These intentional actions caused actual breaches of contract and harmed Plaintiff, leading to financial losses.

Third Cause of Action: Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage (Against All Defendants)

Plaintiff had an ongoing economic relationship with its driver employees. Defendants knowingly interfered with this relationship by trespassing on Plaintiff’s property and encouraging drivers to join Big Bus LA. This caused disruption and economic harm to Plaintiff, who lost both employees and future business opportunities as a result.

Fourth Cause of Action: Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage (Against All Defendants)

Plaintiff also accused Defendants of negligent interference with its relationships with drivers. Defendants’ actions, including trespassing and soliciting employees to leave Starline, disrupted the business relationship, leading to economic harm. Plaintiff claimed the disruption was a result of Defendants’ negligence.

Fifth Cause of Action: Trespass (Against All Defendants)

Plaintiff alleged that Defendants, under the direction of Chris Schlesinger, trespassed on property leased by Plaintiff at the Hollywood & Highland Mall. This interference with Plaintiff’s parking spaces caused additional harm to the business, further supporting the claims of unfair competition.

Defense

Defendants Big Bus Tours Los Angeles, Inc. and Open Top Sightseeing USA denied all allegations in Starline Tours of Hollywood Inc.’s complaint, asserting that Starline suffered no damages and is not entitled to relief.

Defendants raised several affirmative defenses, including that Starline failed to present sufficient facts, did not mitigate its damages, and that unclean hands, unjust enrichment, and expired contracts barred its claims. They also argued that Starline waived its rights, acquiesced to the actions and that the damages were caused by third parties or voluntary termination of at-will employment. Additionally, they contended that Starline’s claims violated public policy and failed to state a claim for equitable relief. Finally, Defendants reserved the right to assert further defenses.

Jury Verdict

On January 12, 2024, the jury ruled in favor of Defendant Big Bus on claims of interference with the Vector contract and unfair business practices. The jury also found that Big Bus did not act with malice, oppression, or fraud. However, the jury sided with the Plaintiff on the interference with the LPG contract claim and awarded $720,000 against Big Bus.

On February 5, 2024, Judge Michael P. Linfield issued a judgment reflecting the jury’s decision.

Court Documents:

Documents are available for purchase upon request at jurimatic@exlitem.com