Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp. Case Brief

California Supreme Court1970Docket #1013088
474 P.2d 689 3 Cal. 3d 176 89 Cal. Rptr. 737 44 A.L.R. 3d 615 1970 Cal. LEXIS 199

Audio Insights: Learn Cases on The Go

Transform downtime into productive study time with our premium audio insights. Perfect for commutes, workouts, or visual breaks from reading.

Reinforces complex concepts Improves retention Multi-modal learning

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: An actress sued a film studio for breach of contract after it canceled her musical film. The studio offered a different, dramatic role as a substitute. The court held the actress was entitled to her full salary because she was not required to accept “different or inferior” work to mitigate damages.

Legal Significance: Establishes that a wrongfully discharged employee’s duty to mitigate damages does not require accepting substitute employment that is different in kind or inferior in status, such as one that removes significant contractual rights held under the original agreement.

Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp. Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Plaintiff Shirley MacLaine Parker, an actress, entered into a contract with Defendant Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp. to play the female lead in a musical film titled “Bloomer Girl” for a guaranteed compensation of $750,000. The contract granted Parker specific approval rights over the film’s director and screenplay. Prior to the start of production, Fox decided to cancel “Bloomer Girl,” thereby breaching the contract. In the same notification of breach, Fox offered Parker the lead role in a different film, a dramatic western titled “Big Country, Big Man,” for the same guaranteed salary. This substitute offer required Parker to film in Australia, whereas “Bloomer Girl” was to be filmed in California. Critically, the new offer eliminated Parker’s contractual rights to approve the director and screenplay, giving Fox the final decision-making authority. Parker rejected the substitute offer and filed suit to recover the full $750,000 guaranteed by the original contract. Fox admitted the breach but raised an affirmative defense, arguing that Parker failed to mitigate her damages by unreasonably rejecting the substitute employment. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Parker.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a wrongfully discharged employee have a duty to mitigate damages by accepting a substitute employment offer that is different in kind and inferior in status to the position specified in the original contract?

No. The court affirmed the summary judgment for the plaintiff, holding that Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does a wrongfully discharged employee have a duty to mitigate damages by accepting a substitute employment offer that is different in kind and inferior in status to the position specified in the original contract?

Conclusion

This case provides a foundational rule in contract damages, clarifying that the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitatio

Legal Rule

The measure of recovery for a wrongfully discharged employee is the contract Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint o

Legal Analysis

The court's analysis focused on the limits of the duty to mitigate Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Exce

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A wrongfully discharged employee must mitigate damages but is not required
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

A judge is a law student who marks his own examination papers.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+