## Facts

- Land wrote a screenplay, “Treat Me Beat,” with Jerry Lewis in mind as the star.
- Land met Lewis at a soda fountain, described her story ideas, and received an oral assurance that Lewis would read the script.
- After Land indicated she would mail the script, Lewis or his production company sent a letter enclosing a written submission release to be signed and returned with the script.
- The release stated, in substance, that the script was submitted without confidentiality obligations and without any duty to pay for ideas absent a separate express agreement.
- Land signed the release and submitted the script under its terms.
- The script was returned with a rejection.
- After release of *The Nutty Professor*, Land claimed the film used ideas from her script without compensation and sued on an implied-in-fact contract theory.

## Issues

1. Whether a signed submission release disclaiming any obligation to pay for submitted ideas bars a claim for breach of implied-in-fact contract based on alleged later use of similar ideas.
2. Whether any genuine dispute of material fact remained on the existence of a contractual duty to pay, given the undisputed execution of the release.

## Decision

- Summary judgment was granted for Jerry Lewis Productions, Inc. and Jerry Lewis.
- The court held the submission release was a complete bar to Land’s implied-in-fact contract claim seeking payment for disclosed ideas.
- Any alleged implied promise arising from the initial oral exchange was displaced by the later executed written release governing the submission.

## Legal Principles

- A writer who submits material pursuant to a written submission release that clearly disclaims any obligation to pay cannot later recover on an implied-in-fact contract theory for the recipient’s alleged use of similar ideas.
- When parties reduce the conditions of an idea submission to an express writing, inconsistent prior oral or implied understandings do not create a contrary payment obligation.
- If the release’s execution and applicability to the submission are undisputed and the release negates any duty to pay, summary judgment is appropriate because no triable issue exists as to contractual liability.

## Conclusion

The court enforced the submission release as the controlling agreement for the screenplay submission, eliminating any implied-in-fact obligation to compensate Land for alleged use of her ideas and warranting summary judgment for the defendants.


Land v. Jerry Lewis Prods., Inc., 140 U.S.P.Q. 351 (Cal. Super. Ct. 1964)