Raden v. Laurie

Citations: 120 Cal. App. 2d 778; 262 P.2d 61; 1953 Cal. App. LEXIS 2012Docket: Civ. 19600

Court: California Court of Appeal; October 23, 1953; California; State Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Plaintiff Ted Raden appeals a summary judgment favoring defendant Charlotte Jacobs in a case involving a contractual dispute regarding the management of Rosetta Jacobs (also known as Piper Laurie). The initial agreement from January 1948 detailed Raden's role as a nonexclusive manager for Rosetta, entitling him to 10% of her earnings. A subsequent agreement was signed on July 30, 1948, which Raden claims was breached, leading him to demand $3,100 as his share of her earnings.

Charlotte Jacobs, Rosetta's mother, submitted an affidavit stating that Rosetta, born January 22, 1932, had disaffirmed the July agreement on October 12, 1949. The affidavit indicated that Raden had expressed an intention to secure employment for Rosetta, but ultimately failed to do so, despite efforts made during 1948 and 1949. Additionally, Raden was not a licensed employment agent, and the agreements lacked approval from the California Labor Commissioner. 

Raden's affidavit asserted he provided valuable career counseling and support, transforming Rosetta’s public persona. He acknowledged taking her to various potential employment venues but claimed this was for her general development rather than securing employment. He argued the January agreement was incorporated into the July agreement, and mentioned that Charlotte contributed financially to a short film project starring Rosetta, which marked her professional debut.

Services were provided to Rosetta for over a year until she secured a contract with Universal International Studio, at which point the plaintiff was dismissed. The plaintiff was not a licensed artists' manager or employment agent. The court granted the respondent's motion based on the claim that the plaintiff acted as an unlicensed manager. According to Labor Code section 1650, an artists' manager must advise and direct an artist's career while also procuring employment only as part of a contractual obligation. The plaintiff's agreement explicitly stated he had no authority or duty to seek employment for Rosetta, only to provide counsel and assist in her training. Although the respondent contended that the act of advising implied a duty to seek employment, there was no evidence that the plaintiff procured employment as part of his duties under the contract. The court found no evidence of misrepresentation or intent to evade the law, and the claims in the defendant's affidavit regarding the plaintiff promising to obtain employment were denied by the plaintiff. The July agreement was upheld as valid, and the court presumed the parties acted in good faith, resolving any doubts in favor of the plaintiff. These issues were deemed inappropriate for summary judgment, as the plaintiff's affidavit should have been accepted as true.

In Weichman v. Vetri, the court addressed the motion for summary judgment, concluding that the plaintiff's assertion of not agreeing to obtain employment for artist Rosetta Jacobs was adequate to contest the motion. The plaintiff's role was limited to counseling and advising Jacobs, not acting as an "Employment Agency" as per Labor Code section 1551. The Labor Commissioner submitted an amicus brief suggesting that a subsequent agreement was merely a façade to mask the plaintiff's true role as an artists' manager, which the court found warranted further examination in a regular trial. Additionally, the court ruled that the minor's disaffirmance of the agreement did not terminate Charlotte Jacobs' obligation to receive her daughter's earnings, nor did it absolve her from being one of the plaintiff's employers. Consequently, the judgment was reversed. The agreement specified that the plaintiff would serve as an advisor and business manager for Rosetta Jacobs until her twenty-first birthday, explicitly stating that he was not to seek employment on her behalf, with compensation set at 10 percent of her earnings. The definition of an artists' manager was also provided, emphasizing their role in guiding artists' careers while facilitating employment as part of their contractual duties.