Styne

Certified for Partial Publication. [*]

This case presents two main issues. The first is whether a trial court has jurisdiction to determine in the first instance whether the activities of a personal manager of a celebrity are encompassed within the Talent Agencies Act (Lab.Code, § 1700 et seq.). [1] The second is whether the celebrity's failure to submit the question to the Labor Commissioner in a timely manner precludes her defense on this ground.

Norton Styne appeals from an order for new trial entered after a jury rendered a verdict in Styne's favor in the amount of $4,330,370. The verdict was against defendants Connie Stevens, Connie Stevens Forever Spring—the Beauty System, Inc., and Connie Stevens Forever Spring II— the Beauty System, Inc. (sometimes referred to collectively as Stevens), in Styne's action for breach of an oral contract by the terms of which Styne was to receive 10 percent of the profits of Stevens's cosmetics business. The trial court ordered a new trial on the ground that it had prejudicially erred in failing to instruct the jury on the requirements of the Act.

We hold that the Labor Commissioner has original jurisdiction to determine the…