The law of motion pictures (1918)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

QUESTIONS OF TRAVEL 177 just as often the language may be too broad or inartificial and the result will be that the actor may recover damages.191 But the language of such a contract is strictly construed, and the manager who assigns his interest in the show to another may not evade liability, for that is not a closing of the theatre.192 Section 56. — Questions of travel. In filming a play it is frequently necessary to take scenes at places other than at the studio of the motion picture producer. An actor who agrees to participate in the making of a picture knows that he may be required to travel while engaged in the making of the picture. He is authorities, or stopped by any cause over which the management have no control.” 191 Hardie v. Balmain (Eng.) (1902), 18 T. L. R. 539. Plaintiff, manager of a company, contracted with defendant, manager of a theatre, to appear for six nights, profits to be divided; if the theatre was closed through fire, death in the Royal Family, “or any cause whatsoever,” contract to be terminated. The theatre was closed on what was to be the opening night, not having been completed. Held that the manager of the theatre was liable under the contract. “Any cause whatsoever” meant any cause external to that outside the control of the parties to the contract. See also: Rice v. Miner (1915), 89 Misc. (N. Y.) 395; 151 N. Y. Supp. 983. 192 Loretle v. Collins (Eng.) (1906), Strong on “Dramatic and Musical Law,” 3d Ed., p. 27. In the contract for plaintiff’s appearance for a week at the Hippodrome, it was provided that in the event of the hall closing for any cause the contract was to terminate. The manager assigned his interest to another. Held this was not a closing, and plaintiff recovered.