Alexander Payne Sued Over ‘The Holdovers’ Screenplay

Screenwriter Simon Stephenson sued director Alexander Payne on Wednesday, alleging that the screenplay for “The Holdovers” was based on his unproduced script set at a children’s hospital, according to Variety. The lawsuit brings a previously public dispute over the film’s origins into court.

Stephenson had taken his allegations to the Writers Guild of America in 2024. According to the report, the union advised him that it could not adjudicate the issue and directed him toward pursuing it outside the guild. That earlier approach did not establish whether copying had occurred.

At the center of the dispute is “Frisco,” Stephenson’s unproduced screenplay about a middle-aged children’s doctor and a teenage patient he must look after. Stephenson contends that “The Holdovers,” despite its different setting, borrowed from his work. His allegations remain claims rather than findings of infringement.

Variety’s earlier reporting described correspondence concerning efforts to bring “Frisco” to Payne’s attention in 2013 and again in 2019. Stephenson cited that history as part of his argument that the director had access to the screenplay. Access, however, is a separate question from whether the finished film copied his work.

“The Holdovers” is credited to screenwriter David Hemingson, with Payne directing. The distinction is important to the account of the dispute: the lawsuit reported by Variety targets Payne, while the film’s credited screenplay authorship belongs to Hemingson. The supplied report excerpt does not establish whether other parties are defendants.

The released film follows an irritable instructor at a New England preparatory school who remains on campus during the Christmas break with students unable to leave, according to distributor Focus Features. Paul Giamatti plays the teacher. Miramax’s official synopsis places the story during the snowy holiday break of 1970.

Those circumstances differ from the hospital setting of “Frisco,” but Stephenson’s complaint concerns his allegation of borrowing beneath that change of location. Comparing the premises provides background to his claim, not an independent determination of its merits. Neither the shared adult-teenager dynamic nor the different settings, considered alone, resolves the dispute described in the reporting.

The move to litigation also separates the controversy from the guild process Stephenson initially pursued. Variety’s 2024 reporting said the WGA explained that its procedures could not provide the extensive fact-finding or remedies he sought. Its recommendation to consider a lawsuit was procedural guidance, not an endorsement of the allegations.

The available excerpt of the new report does not identify the court, specify the damages sought or include a response to the lawsuit from Payne. Payne and Hemingson declined comment for Variety’s original 2024 investigation, but that earlier position should not be treated as their response to the newly reported filing.

The next development will be how Payne responds and what further court documents establish about the allegations and requested relief. For now, the reported filing marks an escalation of Stephenson’s longstanding challenge to the screenplay’s origins, without establishing that infringement occurred.