Me and my friends got kicked out of a movie theater without seeing the movie and didn&#39;t get a refund
<p>Me and my friends went to go see an <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Association_of_America_film_rating_system" rel="noreferrer">R rated movie</a> at an AMC theater. My friend's dad was there to buy the tickets. After that he went back to his car.</p>

<p>When we went to go into the theater the guy who collects the tickets asked us our ages. We told him that we are 15, and he said that we needed a parent with us, so we ran back to the car and had my friend's dad come back with us and they said he needed to be in the theater with us. He bought a ticket and walked to the theater with us and then left.</p>

<p>A few minutes later before the movie even started, the ticket collector came into the theater and asked where our parent was, we replied he left, and the guy escorted us out of the theater and said that we couldn't come back that day, when we asked for a refund he said we couldn't have one.</p>

<p>So I was just wondering if they broke any laws or if they were in the clear.</p>

<p>At a minimum, what the theater did was not a crime. When you are in a movie theater you have what is called a "license" from the theater to be present, which is revocable at will without due process (possibly subject to breach of contract damages) and not a property right to be in the theater the way that a tenant who must be evicted does.</p>

<p>As a practical matter, given that the amount in controversy is, at most, $25 or so, and this is not a situation where the prevailing party would get their attorneys' fees, this is not cost effective to litigate, regardless of who is correct, even in small claims court without an attorney.</p>

<p>Whether or not the theater breached its contract isn't perfectly clear, because usually, the contract between a movie goer and a movie theater is not spelled out in any writing provided to the movie goer, incorporated by reference in something disclosed to the movie goer, or signed by either of the parties, or even with an oral offer and acceptance setting forth all of the terms of the agreement. (Of course, if a written terms of service is actually provided to the movie goer, or a reference to where it can be found is provided to the movie goer, those terms will control and the contract will almost certainly be written to allow the movie theater to do what it did in this case.) In the frequent case where this is not done, the contract between a movie goer an a movie theater is usually a contract implied in fact whose terms at the edges aren't terribly well defined and there is little case law to tell us what the terms of the contract is, because the cases aren't worth litigating up to an appellate court where binding precedents are made.</p>

<p>Indeed, one reason that movie theaters may have declined to put their implied in fact contracts with movie goers in writing is to leave the situation ambiguous so as to discourage someone whose case would be clear even if for a small dollar amount, if the terms of the contact were clear, from suing them over issues like this one. When the stakes are small and the outcome is always uncertain, it almost never makes sense to sue.</p>

<p>There is certainly a colorable argument that you breached the contract by being present without an adult at an R-rating movie when the public statements about an R rating made available to the movie goers says that rated R means only admitted with a person over the age of 17, contrary to the theater's policies on that issue, although it isn't perfectly clear if this is a suggestion or a binding term of the agreement.</p>

<p>Another fair interpretation of the contract between a movie goer and the movie theater is that a movie goer can be removed from any movie whenever, if in the reasonable opinion of the movie theater management, good cause exists to do so, and that its discretion should be upheld so long as it acts in good faith and in a non-discriminatory manner.</p>

<p>I don't agree, however, that the question of whether or not you breached a contract was unambiguously clear, because the terms of the agreement are not well defined. I would give you at least a 20% chance of prevailing if you took the issue to court although I would agree that it is more likely than not that you would not prevail if you took the issue to court.</p>

<p>Your contract is with AMC theaters, not MPAA. Each theater in principle can set it's own contract terms, but it is probably established at the corporate level. Two examples are <a href="https://www.amctheatres.com/movie-theatres/seattle-tacoma/amc-southcenter-16" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a> and <a href="https://www.amctheatres.com/movie-theatres/seattle-tacoma/amc-factoria-8" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>. At the bottom there is a statement of Age Policy for R-Rated Films.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Under 17 required accompanying parent or adult guardian (age 21 or
  older). Guests 25 years and under must show ID. We restrict children
  younger than 6 from attending R-rated films after 6 pm to improve the
  experience for everyone. To bring your children younger than 6 to
  R-Rated films, please visit us before 6pm.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Of course, this is not sufficient notice for walk-up purposes, but you can go to an AMC theory and see references to R-rated film policy, which puts you on notice that there is such a policy.</p>

<p>The terms do not explicitly say that the adult must remain with the minors in the theater, but that is irrelevant. What matters is whether it is reasonable to interpret the R-Rated contract term as meaning "it is sufficient that an adult purchase a ticket, without remaining in the theater". If there were an actual ambiguity of language, you might have a case that there was a breach of contract on their part since the terms should be interpreted in your fvor, but the language is not ambiguous. Failing to explicitly rule out a given scenario is not an ambiguity of language. The part where the ticket-collector tells you to bring the parent further clarifies that the requirement is not just that an adult approve the purchase of the ticket. Since a reasonable person would understand that the contract requires the adult to remain with the minors, and you / he didn't do that, you breached the contract.</p>

<p>The refund policy may or may not be relevant (it states "No refunds after printed showtime", so it depends on what the printed showtime was and when this took place). Their basis for denying a refund would be that you breached the contract. If you sued them for a refund, the court might find that they had not been harmed by your violating the terms of the contract, but then again they might find in favor of the theater. There are substantive reasons for this policy and by breaching the terms of the contract, you put the company at risk. </p>

<p>One of the conditions of contract that you accepted when you bought tickets to an R rated movie is that you would be accompanied by an adult throughout the screening.</p>

<p>You broke the contract. In response, the cinema terminated the contract. You are not entitled to a refund.</p>

<p>The Motion Picture Association of America gives ratings to films, and a rating of R means</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>... Restricted, with no one under 17 admitted without an accompanying parent or guardian. This rating is given for strong and frequent language and violence, nudity for sexual purposes and drug abuse.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The cinema has an obvious argument against allowing you to stay. It was clear that the presence of a parent was necessary to be allowed entry, and without that parent, you were not allowed to be in the theatre.</p>

<p>Had they not removed you, there is just as good a chance they were in breach of a policy, regulation or prior contract related to who they may show films to.</p>

contract-law colorado