Thomson v. Larson
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
147 F.3d 195 (1998)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
Billy Aronson and Jonathan Larson collaborated on the musical Rent. When the two parted ways, they entered a written agreement under which Larson would be credited as the author of Rent, with the original concept and additional lyrics credited to Aronson. Larson brought Rent to the New York Theatre Workshop (NYTW). Larson opposed NYTW’s attempts to hire another writer to revise the script before Larson eventually agreed to NYTW’s hiring of Lynn Thomson (plaintiff) as a dramaturg, whose services included making thematic and structural suggestions to clarify the musical’s storyline. NYTW paid Thomson $2,000 for these services. A contract between NYTW and Larson identified Larson as the sole author of Rent, including approval rights and ownership over any changes made to the text. Larson suddenly died. Thomson attempted to negotiate with Larson’s surviving family members—Allan Larson, Nanette Larson, and Julie Larson McCollum (the heirs) (defendants)—for a share of the royalties from Rent. These negotiations failed. Thomson then brought suit in district court, seeking a declaration that she was the coauthor of Rent and entitled to 16 percent royalties. The court found in favor of the heirs. Thomson appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Calabresi, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 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.
