Home › Case briefs › Civil Procedure

Ferguson v. Writers Guild of America, West, Inc.

California Court of Appeal · Civil Procedure

Civil ProcedureJudicial Review of ArbitrationExhaustion of Administrative RemediesDiscoverynonjusticiabilityarbitrationlimited judicial reviewcredits manual

Facts

Ferguson was hired by Paramount to write a screenplay for "Beverly Hills Cop II," and the Writers Guild later awarded screenplay credit to Ferguson and Warren Skaaren and story credit to Eddie Murphy and Robert D. Wachs. Under the governing basic agreement and the Guild's credits manual, disputed writing credits were resolved by a three-member Guild arbitration process, with limited review by a policy review board for policy or procedural deviations. Ferguson sought a writ requiring the Guild either to award him sole screenplay and story credit or to conduct a new arbitration based on several alleged procedural defects. The record showed that, in seeking policy review within the Guild, Ferguson presented only two substantive objections concerning whether Murphy and Wachs were eligible for story credit and whether Skaaren met the threshold for screenplay credit.

Issue

May a court review the merits of a Writers Guild writing-credit determination and itself decide who deserves screenplay or story credit, or is judicial review limited to whether the Guild materially and prejudicially departed from the procedures required by its credits manual? Also, may a party who did not present alleged procedural defects to the Guild's policy review board obtain judicial relief on those defects or discovery of arbitrators' identities and thought processes?

Rule

Under schedule A and the Writers Guild credits manual, feature-length motion-picture writing-credit disputes are nonjusticiable on the merits. Judicial review is limited to determining whether there has been a material breach of the terms of the credits manual, meaning a material and prejudicial departure from the procedures specified there; courts do not re-decide the merits of credit allocation. In addition, a litigant generally may not pursue judicial relief for procedural defects without first presenting them to the Guild's policy review board, and the identities and deliberative thought processes of Guild arbitrators are not discoverable.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Maya Ortiz and Devon Pike participated in a feature-film writing credit arbitration in Los Angeles under a guild agreement and credits manual that make the arbitration committee's decision final if rendered within the contractual framework. After the committee awarded shared screenplay credit, Maya filed a petition in California superior court attaching all drafts and asking the judge to compare the materials and award her sole screenplay credit because the committee undervalued her contribution.

How should the court rule?

Explanation. The majority held that, under the guild's schedule and credits manual, feature-film writing-credit disputes are nonjusticiable on the merits. A court does not compare drafts and decide who deserves credit. Judicial review is limited to whether there was a material breach of the credits manual—i.e., a material and prejudicial departure from specified procedures. (Derived from Ferguson v. Writers Guild of America, West, Inc. (n.d.).)