Wal-Mart=s
store in Ceres, California, leases space to a McDonald=s
franchise. A sign posted by McDonald=s
asks customers to enjoy their food and drink inside the restaurant.
Approximately once an hour, Wal-Mart makes a similar request through an
announcement over the store=s
intercom system. Nevertheless, customers regularly consume food and beverages
without interference while they browse and shop..Full Story
For over ten years, from 1992 until just this month,
motorcycle giant Kawasaki and one of its St. Louis-area dealerships, Bob
Shultz Motors, went round and round over Kawasaki=s
refusal to allow Schultz Motors to acquire a third dealership in that area. It started when Schultz brought suit in
Missouri state court alleging, inter alia, that Kawasaki wrongfully
refused..Full Story
The franchisees of two hotels were not contractually bound
to comply with the A100%
Satisfaction Guarantee@
program that was implemented by the company that acquired the rights to their
franchise agreements from their former franchisor..Full Story
Defendant Tat-Mau Wong, a Kung-Fu expert, is the president
and sole owner of the common stock of two California corporations, Choy Lay
Fut Kung Fu Institute, Inc. and Champion Arts, Inc,. Choy Lay Institute
operated three Kung-Fu academies, including an academy in Concord,
California. Champion Arts was formed to franchise Kung-Fu Academies under the
trade name ATat
Wong Kung Fu Academies@..Full Story
On
August 24, 1998, Connie Nagrampa entered into an agreement with the defendant
to establish a mail advertising franchise under the auspices of MailCoups.
Nagrampa claims to have been promised income of over $100,000 a year and 41%
profit as a franchisee, but the reality was starkly different. Rather than
making a substantial profit, Nagrampa made no income and incurred substantial
debt, despite working long hours.. Full Story
Can criminal testimony that has been sealed by court order
be opened for civil proceedings?
A man who was a Dunkin’ Donuts franchisee in New
York State participated in a proffer session in August 1999 with the United
States Attorney’s Office in Tucson, Arizona, in which he agreed to
discuss “matters of interest” to the United States Attorney in
exchange for a promise by the government that the information would not be
used against him in “any other proceeding”. Thereafter, the man
made incriminating statements to Assistant United States Attorney Ausa
Huellmantel…Full Story
In
an action by a group of more than forty Baskin-Robbins franchisees against
their franchisor, the franchisees sued Baskin-Robbins, USA, Co. on the news
that Baskin-Robbins decided not to renew their franchise agreements and that
Baskin Robbins supposedly mishandled funds in a common advertising fund. The
other significant complaint that the franchisees asserted were that Baskin
Robbins prevented the franchisees from selling their franchises to third
parties by informing them that they would not be renewed... Full Story
A
lawsuit brought on behalf of a group of American teenagers who claim the fast
food chain McDonald=s
is responsible for their obesity and health problems has been thrown out of
court by a U. S. District Court Judge.The Judge found that the allegations in the complaint were not
specific enough, but the Court allowed the Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint
to try to cure the deficiencies.
The
lawsuit, filed by the parents of two girls, claimed that McDonald=s failed to disclose clearly and
conspicuously the ingredients and effects of its food, much of which is high
in fat, salt, sugar and cholesterol.. Full Story
In May, 2000, respondents Bill and Casey Tipton signed a
licensing agreement with petitioner Solar Planet and entered the tanning
salon business. Under the agreement, the Tiptons were allowed to use Solar
Planet’s name and logo on their salon. They also received both training
and business advice for Solar Planet. In addition, they were to receive the
exclusive right, within the city of Walnut Creek, California, to use a
certain brand of German manufactured tanning beds..Full Story
Franchisees Kevin and Jennifer Lee had operated a
“Great Earth” vitamin store at Los Angeles’s Westside
Pavilion for 16 years. Then, in 1990, they opened a GNC (“General
Nutrition Companies”) store at the same locations. Business was going
well. So, in May 1991, the Lees opened a second GNC store at Southern
California’s Galleria at South Bay.
Their stores prospered, with the Westside Store receiving
the “Million Dollar Store” award in 1997 and the South Bay store
winning an “Operator of the Year” award in 1998. But sales
started declining toward the end of 1998, according to the Lees, because
franchisor GNC had launched what the Lees described as an “unlawful
scheme” to drive the GNC franchisees out of business.. Full Story
On August 27, 1997, the South Dakota Division of
Securities notified Nature’s 10 and its officers that Nature’s 10
franchise registration had expired. Then, on October 1, 1997, the Division
withdrew the company’s registration number effective July 29, 1997.
Nature’s 10 was warned that the company “will no longer be engaged
in the offer or sale of franchises in South Dakota.”
Sam Savage (Savage), a Florida resident, had previously been in the jewelry
business and was interested in operating a jewelry franchise store. Savage
negotiated with Nature’s 10 and signed a franchise agreement with the
company on December 19, 1997—more than four months after Nature’s
10 was no longer authorized to sell franchises. Full Story
Bill and Pamela Ludwig, owners of L&H Tuxes, Inc.
didn’t want to arbitrate in the first place. And in the second place,
as California franchisees and developers, they thought they were protected by
California law from having to arbitrate in Chicago, near where their franchisor,
Gingiss International, Inc., franchisor of Gingiss Formalwear Centers, is
located. But U. S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois,
Eastern Division, decided otherwise in a decision handed down July 11th. Full Story
Pabst Brewing Company could probably use one of its cold
ones right now as it suffers from a severe sales drought in its southeast
region—and the heat brought on by a decision from the Eleventh Circuit
Court of Appeals. Apparently the Federal Court of Appeals didn’t take
kindly to Pabst’s claim that it was justified in terminating a contract
with its southeast distributor for selling non-Pabst products on the side,
and now Pabst has to pay damages for “wrongful termination.” Full Story
Hinton, Inc. operated eighteen Burger King restaurants,
all located in South Carolina. Burger King Corporation (“BKC”)
and Hinton entered into eighteen separate Franchise Agreements and eight
Lease agreements concerning these franchise restaurants. Hinton failed to pay
royalties, advertising, investment spending, rent, property taxes, and other
expenses due under the Franchise Agreements and Leases. After providing
notice of default and the opportunity to cure such default, BKC terminated
the relationship, terminated the franchised businesses and sued Hinton for
damages. The lawsuit was brought in Federal Court in Miami, Florida. Hinton
“justified” its failure to make payments as required under the
Franchise Agreements and Leases with the defense that BKC prevented it from
complying with its contractual obligations through three different actions
and omissions.
Full Story
Mohammed Khan was shot during an armed robbery at the
Shell service station where he worked. Khan sued Shell to recover damages for
his injuries on a theory of negligence based on the three elements of
negligence: 1) a legal duty owed by one person to another; 2) a breach of
that duty; and 3) damages proximately resulting from the breach. Shell
countered with a motion for summary judgment on the ground that it owed no
duty to Khan. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Shell,
from which Khan appealed.
Full Story
Grow Biz International, Inc. (Grow Biz), known to its fans
through its d.b.a., “Play It Again Sports” (PIAS), appeared to be
winning at U.S. District Court, Minnesota, in an injunctive action against a
franchisee over an alleged violation of a non-competition clause. But when it
came to the question of which entity—the franchisor or the
franchisee—stood to suffer the most harm, depending on the outcome, the
Court’s call was franchisee. Full Story
ServiceMaster entered into a franchise agreement with
DLK&P in Nebraska. The Franchise Agreement provided that Tennessee law
would apply to the interpretation of the agreement and also included a
"Post-Term Covenant Not to Compete." In less than two years,
ServiceMaster, gave DLK&P written Notice of Intent to terminate the
franchise for payment defaults by DLK&P. Thereafter DLK&P's principal
filed a petition for relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code and the
assets of DLK&P became part of his bankruptcy estate. Kenneth Proctor
sought to purchase the assets of DLK&P from his father's bankruptcy
estate. ServiceMaster's attorneys, advised Kenneth that he could not use the
assets of DLK&P to operate a competitive business in Lancaster County for
one year after termination. Nevertheless, Kenneth went on to privately
negotiate the sale of DLK&P's assets with the bankruptcy trustee and
reopened the business as PROClean, Inc., with an office at the same location
as the former DLK&P. Full Story
