Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. v. Scheider

360 N.E.2d 930, 40 N.Y.2d 1069 (1976)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. v. Scheider

New York Court of Appeals
360 N.E.2d 930, 40 N.Y.2d 1069 (1976)

Play video

Facts

Producer Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. (MGM) (plaintiff) planned to film a new television show. MGM hired actor Roy Scheider (defendant) to play the lead role in the pilot episode and then in the series if the show was commissioned by a network. In September 1971, the parties orally agreed to general terms and finances. Additional terms were negotiated while the pilot was filmed, with supplemental oral agreements being reached by February 1972. However, there was no agreement as to the start date for filming the series if it was commissioned. After filming the pilot, Scheider refused to film the series. MGM sued Scheider for breach of contract, seeking both damages and an injunction preventing Scheider from working for third parties during the period he should have been rendering services to MGM. Scheider countered that there was no enforceable contract to film the series because the parties never agreed to a start date for filming. Standard industry practice was that if a pilot was shown to a network in the winter, then it was expected to appear on television the following fall if commissioned. Both parties were aware of that custom and that filming for a fall show needed to start no later than June. The trial court originally concluded that there was a contract with industry custom supplying the missing term as to the start date. However, the court also found that the statute of frauds required that the agreement be in writing. Consequently, the parties’ oral agreement was unenforceable. The appellate division found the statute of frauds inapplicable and modified the trial court’s judgment to grant MGM the requested injunction. Scheider appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)

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 741,000 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 741,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 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 741,000 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
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 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