Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
Neither law nor equity provides a remedy for breach of an agreement to agree in the future. Such a contract cannot be made the basis of a cause of action.
Plaintiff actor and defendant movie studio entered into an agreement where the actor would perform in movies and the studio would pay him. The contract had four options which could be exercised by the studio which would extend the contract for one year each. One month after the first option was exercised the actor was called to active duty in the military. One month later, the parties entered into another agreement which added another option year to the original contract and noted that should the actor serve in the military, the parties would agree upon their mutual obligations. Almost two years later, the studio indicated that it was exercising its option for the fourth year. The actor sought to terminate the agreement and filed a declaratory action in the trial court. The trial court ruled in favor of the studio and determined the contract was merely suspended while the actor was in the military. The actor sought review.
Could the second agreement be made as the basis of the defendant’s cause of action?
The court reversed the findings of the trial court in favor of defendant movie studio. The court determined that the second agreement entered into did not extend the original contract and was only an agreement to agree, which could not be made the basis of a cause of action. In the absence of a new agreement to continue the relationship of the parties, there was no duty upon the plaintiff to perform services for the defendant after his discharge from military service.