Batfilm Productions, Inc. v. Warner Bros. Inc.

Nos. BC 051653 and BC 051654, No. BC 051653 and No. BC 051654, Consolidated Cases No. BC 051653 and No. BC 051654, 1994 Cal. Appl. LEXIS 1333 (1994)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
B
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Batfilm Productions, Inc. v. Warner Bros. Inc.

Superior Court of California
Nos. BC 051653 and BC 051654, No. BC 051653 and No. BC 051654, Consolidated Cases No. BC 051653 and No. BC 051654, 1994 Cal. Appl. LEXIS 1333 (1994)

  • Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD

Facts

Benjamin Melniker and Michael Uslan (plaintiffs), owned the movie rights to the Batman comic-book characters. Melniker was the former general counsel and senior executive of MGM, a major motion-picture studio. Melniker and Uslan entered into an agreement with Polygram Pictures, Inc. (Polygram) (defendant) to develop and produce a Batman movie (Batman). Polygram later assigned the contract to Warner Bros. (defendant). Under the agreement, Melniker and Uslan were to receive 13 percent of the “net profits” of the film, as defined under the contract. Under the contract, the calculation of “net profits” included various overhead costs, tax credits for foreign taxes, sound stage holdover charges, only 20 percent of revenue from videocassette distribution, and interest charges on production costs. Melniker, Uslan, and the two corporations that furnished their services, Batfilm Productions, Inc. and Franklin Enterprises, Ltd., (plaintiffs) sued Warner Bros. and Polygram, claiming Melniker and Uslan did not receive their fair net-profits compensation from Batman.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Yaffe, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 802,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Contracts
Entertainment Law

Key Terms