Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., v. Scheider
New York Supreme Court
75 Misc. 2d 418 (1972)

- Written by Miller Jozwiak, JD
Facts
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. (MGM) (plaintiff) was a film producer. MGM entered an agreement with a television network to produce a pilot for a television series. As a part of the project, MGM also entered into an agreement with Roy Scheider (defendant) to appear in the pilot and series. This agreement, however, left unresolved how Scheider would bill MGM for his services. The agreement would bind Scheider for a period of at least 14 months. While the details were being finalized, Scheider filmed the pilot episode in the fall of 1971. Although MGM and Scheider reached a general oral agreement by February 1972, after the pilot was filmed, the parties never agreed in writing to a start date for filming the rest of the series in the event the television network ordered the rest of the series. Industry custom and practice, of which all parties were aware, provided that if a pilot was filmed in the fall and shown to a network in the winter, the network could have the option of producing the series for the following fall. Under this practice, production would therefore begin in the spring, by early June at the latest. The television network later ordered the rest of the series, but Scheider refused to begin filming in June 1972, as MGM requested. MGM sued Scheider for breach of contract. Scheider responded that the contract, if there was one, violated the statue of frauds, and was therefore unenforceable, because it could not be performed within one year of its making and was not in writing.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fein, J.)
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. 46,500 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.