Legal Opinion

Warner Bros. Pictures v. Brodel

California Supreme Court

Decided May 3, 1948No. L. A. 19887PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTraynor, J.

On March 27, 1942, plaintiff, a producer of motion pictures, entered into a written agreement with defendant Brodel, then a minor seventeen years of age, wherein the latter promised to perform dramatic services exclusively for plaintiff “for and during the term of the agreement.” The instrument provided that “the term of this contract” should commence on March 30, 1942, and continue thereafter for 52 weeks; that during this period defendant should receive a weekly salary of $600; and that “in consideration of the terms and covenants of this agreement and of the consent of the producer to the…

2Cases cited44 opinions

  1. Carmichael v. Southern Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
  2. Radice v. People of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
  3. Imperial Ice Co. v. RossierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Keokee Consolidated Coke Co. v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  5. People v. Western Fruit GrowersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943

39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. T. M. Cobb Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
  2. American Casualty Co. v. BakerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
  3. Palo Alto Town & Country Village, Inc. v. Bbtc CompanyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  4. In Re CarrereUnited States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · 1986
  5. Landberg v. LandbergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972

35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API