In the Matter of the Arbitration between Directors Guild of America, Inc. and Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. Relating to “Bad Medicine”
Directors Guild of America Producers Arbitration Tribunal
Case No. 01776 (1986)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Jeffrey Ganz, a member of the Directors Guild of America (DGA) (plaintiff), was hired by Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation (Fox) (defendant) as a coproducer on the film Bad Medicine, which was filmed entirely in Spain. While Ganz was in Spain, he performed work as second unit director of photography, meaning that he was charged with overseeing the film’s auxiliary crew. Fox negotiated the terms and compensation for Ganz’s employment as second unit director with Ganz’s United States-based representative while Ganz was in Spain. Fox failed to pay Ganz the full amount to which he was entitled under the pay rates outlined in the DGA’s Basic Agreement (BA), the collective-bargaining agreement that governed employment terms for DGA members. DGA brought an arbitration against Fox to collect the remaining amounts owed to Ganz. At the arbitration, Ganz testified that he was engaged to provide second-unit-director services prior to leaving the United States, but Fox testified that Ganz volunteered to take on the second-unit-director role only after arriving in Spain. Fox argued that the BA was inapplicable because Ganz was in Spain when he took on the second-unit-director role. Ganz argued that, regardless of where he was when he accepted the second-unit-director role, the BA applied because the negotiations for Ganz’s compensation were handled by Ganz’s United States-based representative.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Brown, Arbitrator)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 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.