Youngclaus v. Omaha Film Board of Trade

Decision Date02 July 1932
Docket NumberNo. 364.,364.
Citation60 F.2d 538
PartiesYOUNGCLAUS v. OMAHA FILM BOARD OF TRADE et al.
CourtU.S. District Court — Panama Canal Zone

Kirkpatrick, Good & Dougherty, of York, Neb., and Moyer & Moyer, of Madison, Neb., for plantiff.

Arthur F. Mullen, Sr., and Arthur F. Mullen, Jr., both of Omaha, Neb., and Bruce Bromley and George Shea, both of New York City, for defendants.

MUNGER, District Judge.

In this suit the plaintiff seeks to enjoin the defendant from enforcing a plan of operation, which he alleges is in violation of the anti-trust laws of the United States. The plaintiff is engaged in business as an exhibitor of moving pictures in Madison, Neb. At Norfolk, Neb., less than fifteen miles away, is a rival moving picture exhibitor. Norfolk is a city having a population of over 9,000 and less than 12,500. The defendant distributors and others entered into an agreement among themselves not to license the use of a picture by the plaintiff for a period of time (not exceeding ten days) after the picture had been displayed by the rival theater at Norfolk.

It has been the custom of distributors of moving pictures to place in contracts licensing the use of such pictures by exhibitors a provision that the licensee is to have the right to exhibit the picture a certain number of days before it may be exhibited in other theaters in the same territory, although such other theaters may have licenses to exhibit the same picture, and to place in the license contracts of such other theaters a provision that the picture must not be exhibited until the end of this so-called protection period.

The agreement of which the plaintiff complains is as follows:

"Uniform Zoning and Protection Plan for the Omaha Distribution Territory.

"July 22, 1930

"The following Zoning and Protection Plan is the result of careful study of the protection and run situations in the City of Omaha and the Omaha Distribution Territory by General Committee representing all interests and established for the purpose of working out a uniform plan for runs and protection that would be fair and reasonable to all concerned.

"The General Committee and Sub-committees held a series of meetings from June 23 to July 22, 1930, at Omaha, Nebraska, considering complaints and suggestions that have been made or filed concerning runs and protection.

"A continuing zoning committee was appointed by the General Committee for the season of 1930-31 as follows:

"R. S. Ballantyne R. W. Thayer "S. W. Fitch Harry Goldberg "Phil Monsky E. R. Cummings "W. H. Creal W. A. Bowker "Sam Epstein H. B. Day "C. A. Brown C. E. Williams "Regina Molseed, Secretary to Committee.

"The above committee will meet as the occasion requires hereafter as determined by the Committee, to hear any complaints of any Exhibitor or Distributor in the territory with reference to this Zoning and Protection Plan, and to determine what is proper and fair zoning or classification of any theatre not covered herein or that may be constructed during such season. A circular letter is being sent to all exhibitors in the territory advising them of the existence of the Continuing Zoning Committee and any requests or complaints for the attention of the Committee should be addressed to Regina Molseed, Secretary to the Continuing Zoning Committee, Omaha Film Board of Trade, Medical Arts Building, Omaha, Nebraska.

"Protection and run clauses in all contracts should be complete, explicit and impossible to misinterpret. Verbal protection is unenforcible. By having the runs in the territory uniform and clearly defined, costly and disagreeable blunders and mistakes in booking may be avoided and eliminated. By restricting protection within reasonable limits enterprising exhibitors can book attractions at earlier dates when they will produce greater revenue at their theaters. We ask that you do your part in carrying out the Zoning Plan as agreed upon in spirit as well as in contract, thereby making the plan and its provisions a part of your contract by reference.

"First run theatres may specify protection over suburban theatres by naming the theatres and number of days' protection in their contracts, provided the theatre and number of days are within the maximum defined in the Zoning Plan. Subsequent runs may define the prior run theatres they will or will not follow in their contracts. Adjacent suburbs and towns within ten miles of the city limits are considered as part of the same city in determining first run theatre protection over the city theatres in such town or city.

"Classification of admission to be arrived at by night prices. In theatres charging various admissions, classification to be determined by admission on the particular picture as to the admission charged, e. g., if a theatre charges 30c admission on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday they would be entitled to protection period set aside for 30c run. If admission of 25c is charged on other days of the week protection provided for this classification must prevail on the run of the picture.

"All plans or devices to avoid a true admission classification or run for any theatre, such plan or device for the evasion of a true admission price classification or run may cause the reclassification of such theatre by Zoning Committee, who in their discretion may classify the theatre in accordance with the actual admission value of such theatre.

"Runs and Protection

"Paramount, World and Orpheum, Omaha, maximum protection in the City of Omaha after the last day of exhibition over all subsequent run as follows:

                   38 days over theatres charging admission of 35c
                   42   "   "      "        "         "     "  30c
                   56   "   "      "        "         "     "  25c
                   77   "   "      "        "         "     "  20c
                   98   "   "      "        "         "     "  15c
                  120   "   "      "        "         "     "  10c
                

"State, Omaha, maximum protection after the last day of exhibition over all subsequent runs as follows:

                   28 days over theatres charging admission of 35c
                   35   "   "      "        "         "      " 30c
                   42   "   "      "        "         "      " 25c
                   63   "   "      "        "         "      " 20c
                   84   "   "      "        "         "      " 15c
                  106   "   "      "        "         "      " 10c
                

"Paramount, World and Orpheum, Omaha, maximum protection after the last day of exhibition, thirty (30) days over Strand, Broadway and Liberty, Council Bluffs. Seven (7) days additional for each five (5c) cents less charged in admission.

"State, Omaha, maximum protection after the last day of exhibition, twenty-eight (28) days over Strand, Broadway and Liberty, Council Bluffs. Seven (7) days additional for each five cents (5c) less charged in admission.

"Strand and Broadway, Council Bluffs, maximum protection after the last day of exhibition, fourteen (14) days over the Liberty, charging an admission of 30c and seven (7) days additional for each five cents (5c) less in admission.

"Paramount, World and Orpheum, Omaha, maximum protection after the last day of exhibition as follows:

"28 days over theatres located within a radius of from 1 to 25 miles of Omaha.

"7 days over theatres located within a radius of from 25 to 35 miles of Omaha.

"Council Bluffs, maximum protection after the last day of exhibition as follows:

"7 days over theatres located in Iowa within 35 mile radius of Omaha.

"Sioux City, Iowa.

"Capital and Orpheum, Sioux City, Ia., maximum protection after the last day of exhibition as follows:

                   38 days over theatres charging
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Ring v. Spina, 230.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • April 19, 1945
    ...282 U.S. 30, 51 S.Ct. 42, 75 L.Ed. 145; Fox Film Corp. v. Muller, 296 U.S. 207, 56 S.Ct. 183, 80 L.Ed. 158; Youngclaus v. Omaha Film Board of Trade, D.C. Neb., 60 F.2d 538, 540. The agreement also forbids outright sale of radio, television, and other subsidiary rights in the play prior to i......
  • United States v. Paramount Pictures
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • June 11, 1946
    ...7 Cir., 150 F.2d 877, affirmed 326 U.S. ___, 66 S.Ct. 574; Goldman Theatre v. Loew's Inc., 3 Cir., 150 F.2d 738; Youngclaus v. Omaha Film Board of Trade, D.C.Neb., 60 F.2d 538. The only way competition may be introduced into the present system of fixed prices, clearances, and runs is to req......
  • Mid-West Theatres Co. v. Co-Operative Theatres
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Michigan
    • September 10, 1941
    ...S. Ct. 951, 58 L.Ed. 1490, L.R.A.1915A, 788; Local 167 v. United States, 291 U.S. 293, 54 S.Ct. 396, 78 L.Ed. 804; Youngclaus v. Omaha Film Board of Trade, D.C., 60 F.2d 538. This court maintains that there is a distinction between using your power to make a legal contract and using your po......
  • Westway Theatre v. Twentieth Century-Fox F. Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • January 3, 1940
    ...a result of combination or conspiracy of numerous distributors or exhibitors or both, they have been held invalid. Youngclaus v. Omaha Film Board of Trade, D. C., 60 F.2d 538. See also First Nat. Pictures, Inc. v. Robison, 9 Cir., 72 F.2d 37; Vitagraph, Inc. v. Perelman, 3 Cir., 95 F.2d 142......

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