Assignment 73

Tamarind Lithography Workshop v. Sanders

FACTS:In March !"!# Sanders agreed in $riting to $rite# direct# and prod%ce a motionpict%re &or Tamarind. Sanders comp'eted the ('m# $hich he directed# a%thored#s%pervised# and e)hi*ited artistic contro' over. A&ter the ('m $as screened the (rsttime# a disp%te arose *et$een the parties concerning their rights and o*'igations tothe contract. Litigation on this s%*+ect *egan# *%t *e&ore any +%dgment $as r%'edthe parties entered into another $ritten contract $hich stated that Sanders $o%'dget screen credit ,A Fi'm *y Terry Sanders.- Tamarind did not comp'y $ith thisagreement. Sanders so%ght damages in co%rt and $as a$arded /0#111 *y a +%rythat &o%nd Tamarind had *reached the agreement. The co%rt# ho$ever# &o%nd that

Tamarind had so'e o$nership rights o& the ('m. Sanders re2%ested speci(cper&ormance *%t $as denied# $hich res%'ted in this appea'.

ISS 4:Can Sanders *e a$arded speci(c per&ormance5

64CISI 8:Sanders is entit'ed to re'ie& consisting o& the damages recovered and an in+%nctionagainst &%rther in+%ry.

6ISC SSI 8: It is tr%e that 'ega' remedies &or Sanders are inade2%ate *eca%se it is di9c%'t toacc%rate'y assess the damages associated $ith the sho$ing o& the ('m $hich mayocc%r a great many times;. The 'oss o& p%*'icity &rom the ('m &or Sanders is a'sodi9c%'t to meas%re in monetary means *eca%se p%*'ic acc'aim is a'most impossi*'eto 2%anti&y in monetary terms. <o$ever# Sanders did &%''y per&orm his o*'igationso& the contract *y re'easing a'' c'aims o& copyright to the ('m. It is a'so &o%nd thatthe agreement $as s%9cient'y de(nite to permit en&orcement o& Tamarind=sper&ormance as promised. Th%s# Sanders is entit'ed to re'ie& consisting o& thedamages recovered and an in+%nction against &%rther in+%ry.

> L4S F LAW: When there is no ade2%ate remedy at 'a$ in e2%ity# speci(c per&ormance# a co%rtdecree ordering the *reaching party to render the promised per&ormance# can *ea$arded.