Psenicska v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o...

Psenicska v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. | 450 A.2d 984 (Super.Pa. 1981)

There are an abundance of shows and movies that poke fun at, or even prank, unsuspecting people. And some of these recorded reactions are so embarrassing that you wonder how these people even granted permission for their clips to air. In the two thousand eight case of Psenicska versus Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, we explore this very question.

Michael Psenicska and other nonactors appeared in a two thousand six Twentieth Century Fox movie entitled Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan. The movie was a mockumentary comedy depicting a reporter from Kazakhstan, named Borat, played by Sacha Baron Cohen. In the film, Borat comes to the U S and interviews several real-life Americans, who generally perceive Borat to be a foreigner with little to no understanding about American culture.

Psenicska owned a driving school and was approached by one of the film’s producers to conduct a driving lesson for a foreigner in a documentary about the integration of foreigners into the American lifestyle. Psenicska agreed and signed a standard consent agreement prior to filming.

The agreement stipulated that Psenicska wasn’t relying on representations about the identity of anyone in the film or the nature of the documentary-style film. The consent agreement also provided that Psenicska specifically waived all claims related to his participation in the movie, including claims of fraud based on alleged deception or surprise related to the agreement or the film.

During the driving lesson, Borat drove erratically, engaged in conversations with strangers, and made vulgar and derogatory remarks about various genders, races, and religions. Psenicska’s reactions were captured on film, and he tried to contact the producers, claiming he was set up. Psenicska received no response.

As a result, Psenicska, and several other nonactors, sued Twentieth Century Fox and others associated with the film in district court for damages associated with alleged misrepresentations made by the filmmakers. Twentieth Century moved to dismiss, claiming it had a valid agreement releasing the claims at issue.

Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/psenics...

The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o...

Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/psenics...

Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_...

Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o...

Facebook ►   / quimbeedotcom  

Twitter ►   / quimbeedotcom  

#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries