## Facts

- The Boston Symphony Orchestra, Inc. (BSO) contracted with Vanessa Redgrave to serve as narrator for performances of Stravinsky’s *Oedipus Rex* in Boston and New York.
- After the engagement was announced, the BSO received protests from subscribers and members of the public objecting to Redgrave’s political views, including her support for the PLO and criticism of Israel.
- The BSO cancelled the engagement; Redgrave alleged the cancellation was an accommodation of political opposition to her views, while the BSO asserted it acted out of concern about disruption and security risks.
- Redgrave sued for (1) breach of contract, seeking the agreed fee and consequential damages for lost professional opportunities, and (2) violation of the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act (MCRA), Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 12, §§ 11H–I.
- A jury found a wrongful breach and awarded the contract fee plus $100,000 in consequential damages; it found for the BSO on the MCRA claim in an advisory capacity.
- The district court set aside the consequential-damages award on First Amendment grounds and rejected MCRA liability because cancellation in response to third-party pressure was not “threats, intimidation, or coercion.”
- On certification, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court answered that the alleged conduct did not satisfy the MCRA’s “threats, intimidation, or coercion” requirement.
- The First Circuit, sitting en banc, resolved the appeal and cross-appeal.

## Issues

1. Whether Massachusetts contract law permits consequential damages for loss of identifiable professional opportunities resulting from a breach, and what proof is required.
2. Whether the evidence supported the jury’s $100,000 consequential-damages award.
3. Whether the First Amendment bars consequential damages where the breach occurred in a dispute involving political controversy.
4. Whether cancelling an engagement in response to third-party political pressure can constitute “threats, intimidation, or coercion” under the MCRA.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the finding that the BSO breached its contract and that consequential damages are available in principle for proven loss of identifiable professional opportunities.
- The court held the district court erred in treating the First Amendment as categorically barring consequential damages in this contract case because the damages, if properly shown, would flow from cancellation of the engagement rather than punishment of protected expression.
- The court concluded the record did not support the full $100,000 consequential-damages award because much of the asserted career harm was too speculative or attributable to independent causes; it reduced or required reduction of that award to an amount supported by the evidence.
- The court rejected the MCRA claim, holding that under Massachusetts law (as authoritatively construed by the state high court) the alleged conduct did not amount to “threats, intimidation, or coercion.”

## Legal Principles

- Under Massachusetts contract law, consequential damages may be recovered for loss of identifiable professional opportunities if the plaintiff proves proximate causation with sufficiently concrete evidence rather than generalized, speculative claims of reputational harm.
- A damages award must rest on a reasonable evidentiary basis permitting an inference that the breach caused the specific losses claimed; conjectural or independently caused losses are not compensable.
- Enforcing private contract obligations through damages does not, without more, violate the First Amendment merely because the dispute arose from politically charged circumstances; the relevant inquiry is whether liability penalizes protected expression or instead compensates for breach.
- The MCRA requires “threats, intimidation, or coercion”; a private party’s cancellation of a contract, even if responsive to public disapproval of another’s political views, does not satisfy that element absent coercive conduct directed at the plaintiff.

## Conclusion

The court left Redgrave with contract remedies for the cancelled engagement, allowing only consequential damages supported by non-speculative proof, and held that the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act did not apply because the cancellation in response to outside political pressure lacked the statutorily required threats, intimidation, or coercion.


Redgrave v. Bos. Symphony Orchestra, Inc., 855 F.2d 888 (1st Cir. 1988) (en banc)