Motion Picture Herald (May-Jun 1946)

PUT MORE LIGHT ON YOUR SCREEN 9 All reflectors gradually deteriorate to a state where replacement cost is insignificant. A drop of only 10% in reflective efficiency results in a corresponding decrease in screen brilliancy, and represents a loss amounting to 10% of the cost of your current and carbons. Replace yours now, and regularly. Available for all types and makes of arc lamps. NATIONAL TH EATRE SUPPLY Dhrittonoi Notional 'SlnipIeK'SluclmMt^ inc. 'There's a Branch Near You" STRONG COPPER OXIDE AND TUBE TYPE RECTIFIERS For converting A.C. to D.C. os the ideal power supply for projection arc lamps. Low original, operating and maintenance costs. Quiet operation. Distributed through leading independent theatre supply dealers. THE STRONG ELECTRIC CORP. 87 City Park Ave., Toledo 2, Ohio The World's Largest Manufacturer of Projection Arc Lamps GEORGE MILLER WILL BE GLAD TO HELP YOU MEASURE THE EFFICIENCY OF YOUR PROJECTION-SOUND SYSTEM See explanation on page 36 A LINE O* LAW OR TWO Actual suits invo/vlng points of law bearing on theatre operation, concisely describod oad analyzed in laymen's terms for tha purpose of helping theatre management to avoid conditions which might lead it to be sued, and of providing cases on which Its own safh or legal defense might be based. All decisions given are of higher courts and of recent dot*. BY LEO T. PARKER. Member Ohio Bar Charity No Defense If Admission Is Charged IT IS WELL established law that charitable organizations are not required to use the same degree of care to safeguard patrons against injuries as the law requires of ordinary theatres operated for profit. However, according to a late higher court decision, an amusement or theatre corporation which charges admission is not a charitable organization, although it is operated without profit. In Langheim v. Denison (21 N. W. [2d] 295), reported February, 1946, a person was injured while in a place of amusement that was organized as a corporation not for pecuniary profit, but which charged admission fees from the public. A patron was killed, and his dependents sued the amusement corporation for damages. The counsel for the corporation contended that the corporation could not be held liable because it was operated without profit for benefit of the public and that, therefore, it was a "charitable" organization. The lower court agreed with this contention and held the amusement corporation not liable; however, the higher court reversed the decision, saying: "One operating a place of public amusement to which an admission fee is charged is required to exercise ordinary or reasonable care to guard against injury to his patrons. . . . Upon payment of admission charges, they are in the same category as theatres, race tracks, fairs and other public amusements." Extra Building Costs No Tax Deduction EXTRA cost of radical changes in plans of a theatre building is the "cost" of the building, and it is not deductible as "losses" for tax purposes. For illustration, in DriscoU v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue ( 147 Fed. [2d] 493), it was shown that while constructing a building a part of the air-conditioning system, such as fans and motors, were removed because the owner concluded that radical changes should be made in the plans. The cost of the changes in air-conditioning and plumbing, together with ad ditional fees to the architect and contractor, was $61,160.70. The owner claimed this amount as a loss "deduction" from his income tax. The higher court refused to allow this amount as a deduction, saying that it was part of the cost of the building. Liability for Expense Of Mortgage Service THE HOLDER of a mortgage must pay expenses incidental to keeping the mortgage valid and effective, according to Korr v. Butz (40 Atl. [2d] 699), reported March, 1946. It was shown that the owner of a building, known as the "Earle Theatre," purchased it subject to a prior mortgage of $100,000. The mortgage was secured by bond holders. The interest rate specified in the original mortgage was 6%. Later an agreement was entered into between the theatre owner and the various bond holders which provided for the reduction of the interest rate from 6% to 5%. The higher court held this agreement valid, and also held that the holder of the mortgage must pay commission. City Ordinances Cannot Violate State Statutes ALL CITY ordinances are void which contradict or violate a state law. This was interestingly illustrated in a case involving Sunday motion picture performances. (City of Harlan v. Scott, 162 S. W. [2d] 8). Here it was shown that a state law was enacted which prohibited "trades, occupations and business" on Sunday. The law further provided that the operation of a motion picture show should not be construed to be "work, labor or a trade or business". A municipality passed an ordinance which prohibited Sunday operation of motion picture theatres. The higher court promptly held this law invalid, saying: "A municipal ordinance prohibiting Sunday operation of picture shows is invalid since all municipal authority comes from the Legislature, and municipal ordinances must be in harmony vnth the general laws of the State." 30 BETTER THEATRES. JUNE I. 1946