Beverly Glen Music, Inc. v. Warner Communications, Inc.

Decision Date19 March 1986
Docket NumberNo. B015417,B015417
Citation178 Cal.App.3d 1142,224 Cal.Rptr. 260
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
PartiesBEVERLY GLEN MUSIC, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WARNER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Elektra/Asylum/Nonsuch Records, a division of Warner Communications, Inc., and Anita Baker, Defendants and Respondents.

Ronald N. Wilson, Jonathan R. Ivy, Wilson & Becks for plaintiff and appellant.

Lary Alan Rappaport, Bert H. Deixler, George R. McCambridge, Shinaan S. Krakowsky, Ginna Ingram, McCambridge & Deixler for defendants and respondents.

KINGSLEY, Acting Presiding Justice.

The plaintiff appeals from an order denying a preliminary injunction against the defendant, Warner Communications, Inc. We affirm.

FACTS

In 1982, plaintiff Beverly Glen Music, Inc. signed to a contract a then-unknown singer, Anita Baker. Ms. Baker recorded an album for Beverly Glen which was moderately successful, grossing over one million dollars. In 1984, however, Ms. Baker was offered a considerably better deal by defendant Warner Communications. As she was having some difficulties with Beverly Glen, she accepted Warner's offer and notified plaintiff that she was no longer willing to perform under the contract. Beverly Glen then sued Ms. Baker and sought to have her enjoined from performing for any other recording studio. The injunction was denied, however, as, under Civil Code section 3423, subdivision Fifth, California courts will not enjoin the breach Following this ruling, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the action against Ms. Baker. Plaintiff, however, then sued Warner Communications for inducing Ms. Baker to breach her contract and moved the court for an injunction against Warner to prevent it from employing her. This injunction, too, was denied, the trial court reasoning that what one was forbidden by statute to do directly, one could not accomplish through the back door. It is from this ruling that the plaintiff appeals.

of a personal service contract unless the service is unique in nature and the performer is guaranteed annual compensation of at least $6,000, which Ms. Baker was not.

DISCUSSION

From what we can tell, this is a case of first impression in California. While there are numerous cases on the general inability of an employer to enjoin his former employee from performing services somewhere else, apparently no one has previously thought of enjoining the new employer from accepting the services of the breaching employee. While we commend the plaintiff for its resourcefulness in this regard, we concur in the trial court's interpretation of the maneuver.

"It is a familiar rule that a contract to render personal services cannot be specifically enforced." (Foxx v. Williams (1966) 244 Cal.App.2d 223, 235, 52 Cal.Rptr. 896.) An unwilling employee cannot be compelled to continue to provide services to his employer either by ordering specific performance of his contract, or by injunction. To do so runs afoul of the Thirteenth Amendment's prohibition against involuntary servitude. (Poultry Producers Etc. v. Barlow (1922) 189 Cal. 278, 288, 208 P. 93.) However, beginning with the English case of Lumley v. Wagner (1852) 42 Eng.Rep. 687, courts have recognized that, while they cannot directly enforce an affirmative promise (in the Lumley case, Miss Wagner's promise to perform at the plaintiff's opera house), they can enforce the negative promise implied therein (that the defendant would not perform for someone else that evening). Thus, while it is not possible to compel a defendant to perform his duties under a personal service contract, it is possible to prevent him from employing his talents anywhere else. The net effect is to pressure the defendant to return voluntarily to his employer by denying him the means of earning a living. Indeed, this is its only purpose, for, unless the defendant relents and honors the contract, the plaintiff gains nothing from having brought the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Moss v. Superior Court (Ortiz)
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • February 2, 1998
    ...93; Woolley v. Embassy Suites, Inc. (1991) 227 Cal.App.3d 1520, 1533, 278 Cal.Rptr. 719; Beverly Glen Music, Inc. v. Warner Communications, Inc. (1986) 178 Cal.App.3d 1142, 1144, 224 Cal.Rptr. 260.) 12 Some courts have simply dismissed involuntary servitude claims made in the context of sup......
  • Sims Snowboards, Inc. v. Kelly
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • December 6, 1988
    ...has been interpreted to bar enjoining the prospective employer in a tort suit as well. Beverly Glen Music, Inc. v. Warner Communications, Inc., 178 Cal.App.3d 1142, 224 Cal.Rptr. 260 (1986). As the forum state, Oregon will apply its own law if the issue is one that is "procedural"--concerne......
  • State v. Brownson
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Court of Appeals
    • July 17, 1990
    ...to labor against his or her will as part of the remedy of specific performance. See, e.g., Beverly Glen Music v. Warner Communications, 224 Cal.Rptr. 260, 261, 178 Cal.App.3d 1142, 1145 (1986). ...
  • Woolley v. Embassy Suites, Inc.
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • February 28, 1991
    ...run contrary to the Thirteenth Amendment's prohibition against involuntary servitude. (Beverly Glen Music, Inc. v. Warner Communications, Inc. (1986) 178 Cal.App.3d 1142, 1144, 224 Cal.Rptr. 260.) Courts wish to avoid the friction and social costs which result when the parties are reunited ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Specific Performance of Enlistment Contracts
    • United States
    • Military Law Review No. 205, September 2010
    • September 1, 2010
    ...as not applying to services rendered to the Government or to states as part of 185 Beverly Glen Music, Inc. v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 224 Cal. Rptr. 260, 261 (Cal. Ct. App. 1986); see also Poultry Producers of S. Cal. v. Barlow, 189 Cal. 278, 288 (1922) (“[I]t would be an invasion of one’s ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT