Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

Towns v. Dirs. Guild of Am., Inc.

Towns v. Dirs. Guild of Am., Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

January 19, 2022, Filed

No. 21-12044 Non-Argument Calendar

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff Marvin George Towns appeals the district court's order dismissing his claims against defendant Directors Guild of America, Inc. ("DGA"). After careful review, we affirm.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Towns, an African-American man, has worked for decades in the film and television industry.1 In 2019, And Action, LLC, hired Towns to work as the unit production manager for a television series, The Have & Have Nots, filmed in Georgia.

DGA is the [*2]  labor union that serves as the collective bargaining agent for directors, assistant directors, and unit production managers working in the film and television industry. Towns is a member of DGA.

DGA negotiated a collective bargaining agreement, referred to as the Basic Agreement, with employers in the film and television industry. The Basic Agreement addresses the hiring of directors, unit production managers, and assistant directors for film and television projects.2 It calls for the use of qualification lists, which consist of individuals who, by virtue of documented work experience, receive preference for director, unit production manager, and assistant director positions. Under the Basic Agreement, there are three sets of qualification lists for each type of position: one set of lists for southern California, a second set for the New York area, and a third set for the remainder of the United States, which is referred to as the "Third Area."

The Basic Agreement sets forth the requirements for an individual to be included on each qualification list. To appear on the qualification list for unit production managers in the Third Area, an individual must have previously completed 120 [*3]  days in work as a unit production manager with at least 75% of those days occurring during production, as opposed to during preparation or post-production. An individual does not have to be a DGA member to appear on a qualification list.

To be included on a qualification list, an individual must apply to DGA Contract Administration ("DGACA"), which compiles and administers the qualification lists. Under the Basic Agreement, an applicant bears the burden to provide DGACA with sufficient documentation to establish that he should be included on a qualification list.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 1576 *; 2022 WL 169017

MARVIN GEORGE TOWNS, JR., Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DIRECTORS GUILD OF AMERICA, INC., AND ACTION, LLC, JOHN DOE CORPORATION OR OTHER TYPE OF LEGAL ENTITY KNOWN AS, Director's Guild of America, Defendants-Appellees.

Notice: PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

Prior History:  [*1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. D.C. Docket No. 1:19-cv-03248-MLB.

Towns v. Dirs. Guild of Am., Inc., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123826, 2020 WL 4001131 (N.D. Ga., July 15, 2020)

Disposition: AFFIRMED.

CORE TERMS

district court, labor organization, qualification, preempted, tort claim, fair representation, federal law, collective bargaining agreement, production manager, motion to dismiss, lists, state law claim, argues, fail to state a claim, right-to-work, television, film

Civil Procedure, Appeals, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Constitutional Law, Supremacy Clause, Federal Preemption, Defenses, Demurrers & Objections, Motions to Dismiss, Failure to State Claim, Labor & Employment Law, Collective Bargaining & Labor Relations, General Overview, Reviewability of Lower Court Decisions, Preservation for Review, Federal Preemption, Primacy of Labor Policy