PARKER v th 20 CENTURY FOX BACKGROUND BORN

PARKER v. th 20 CENTURY FOX

BACKGROUND § BORN ON APRIL 24, 1934 § NAMED AFTER SHIRLEY TEMPLE § FOCUSED ON BALLET BEFORE MOVING ON TO ACTING § FIRST MOVIE WAS THE TROUBLE WITH HARRY PRODUCED IN 1955 § LARGEST SALARY PRIOR TO THE BLOOMER GIRL CONTRACT WAS $350, 000 + 7. 5% PROFITS FOR HER ROLE IN IRMA LA DOUCE

BACKGROUND § Founded on December 28, 1934 by the merger of Fox Films and 20 th Century Pictures, Inc. § Experienced several production and financial problems during the 1960 s.

FACTS § Shirley Mac. Laine Parker contracted with Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation in August 1965 §Parker was to play the leading female role in the upcoming production of Bloomer Girl §Payment of $750, 000 for 14 weeks of services was to be paid to Parker § Her contract allowed her to give approval of the director

FACTS § Bloomer Girl was a musical comedy § The film would be filmed in Los Angeles California § Fox cancelled the production of Bloomer Girl § Offered her repudiation in the form of a different movie

FACTS § Big Country, Big Man was the name of the movie §The new movie was a western and not a musical § Australia is the location where the movie would be filmed § The director had already been chosen for the new film

Contracts Big Country, Big Man Bloomer Girl Filmed in California, very close to home Filmed in Austra li very far from ho a, me Country Western , wouldn’t use actresses talents Musical, would use actresses talents as a singer and dan cer Could choose director

FACTS § Gonzales v. Internat. Assn. of Machinists, supra, 213 Cal. App. 2 d 817, 823 -824 § Chisholm v. Preferred Bankers' Life Assur. Co. (1897) 112 Mich. 50 [70 N. W. 415] § Williams v. National Organization, Masters, etc. (1956) 384 Pa. 413 [120 A. 2 d 896, 901 [13]

FACTS § Fox argued that Shirley didn’t accept their attempt to mitigate damages, and therefore didn’t deserve the $750, 000 § There was never an argument that she didn’t make a reasonable search for other employment. § She was under exclusive contract to Fox so she didn’t need to go elsewhere § It’s an objective standard of reasonableness § Her contract had a “pay-or-play” provision

Sole issue is whether refusal of Twentieth Century Fox’s substitute film Big Country may be used in mitigation

Victory! Facts Judge rules that the defense doesn’t have enough evidence to go to trial. Judgment is in favor of the plaintiff.

Facts Rule 56 The judge decides if the opposing side has enough evidence to go to trial. Parker v. Fox Summary Judgment Trial by Jury

HOLDING § Summary judgment affirmed.

REASONING § She had sued for payment under the contract § Sole issue is whether refusal of Twentieth Century Fox substitute off of Big Country may be used in mitigation § Was Big Country inferior employment to Bloomer Girl § Studio had purchased an option on her time § No breach and therefore no reason to mitigate

DISSENTING OPINION § Judgment should be reversed so that the issue of whether or not the offer of the lead role in “Big Country, Big Man” was of employment comparable to that of the lead role in “Bloomer Girl” may be determined at trial.