Franchising & Distribution Law Blog


Blog Editors



Posts from October 2015.
By Daniel Garner on October 28, 2015 at 6:00 PM

A California judge dismissed a class action lawsuit against MillerCoors that alleged deceptive advertising related to the brewing conglomerate’s Blue Moon beverage — specifically its status as a “craft” beer.

In Evan Parent v. MillerCoors LLC, Case No: 3:15-cv-1204-GPC-WVG (S.D. Cal. Oct. 26, 2015), the plaintiffs alleged that MillerCoors was deceiving consumers by (a) advertising Blue Moon on its website as a “craft” beer, and (b) advertising it as “artfully crafted” and brewed by the Blue Moon Brewing Co. on bottles and commercials, then selling it at premium prices.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Franchising & Distribution Group on October 27, 2015 at 10:28 AM

The American Bar Association’s annual Forum on Franchising took place recently, and Greensfelder, Hemker & Gale attorneys David Harris, Dawn Johnson, Beata Krakus, Kim Myers, Abby Risner and Leonard Vines, as well as franchise paralegal Tom Ligouri, attended the two-day program in New Orleans.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Beata Krakus on October 23, 2015 at 2:10 PM

NLRB’s Richard Griffin and DOL’s David Weil address joint employer issues at the ABA Forum on Franchising

Joint employer issues have preoccupied many in the franchise field for some time now. So it is no surprise that a session with Richard F. Griffin, Jr., the general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), and David Weil, the administrator of the Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) and author of “The Fissured Workplace,” drew large crowds at the 38th annual meeting of the American Bar Association Forum on Franchising.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Franchising & Distribution Group on October 12, 2015 at 11:31 AM

We previously reported on the proposed amendments to the California Franchise Relations Act (CFRA) in a Sept. 28 blog post. The proposed bill was signed into law by the governor on Sunday, Oct. 11, and will take effect Jan. 1, 2016.

The bill revises the previous provisions of the CFRA regarding termination, introduces a restriction on a franchisor’s ability to prevent transfers by a franchisee and broadens the franchisor’s obligation to repurchase inventory. Critics of the bill are concerned that it will turn franchisors away from California, while the bill’s proponents laud it as strengthening franchisee rights.

Over the past several years, California has severely restricted the permissible scope of non-competition covenants, and many California courts have been liberal towards franchisees. Yet, franchisors continue to sell franchises in the state. Whether the amendments to the CFRA are the drop that spills the glass remains to be seen. Only time will tell about the real impact of the amendment.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email

This website uses cookies to improve functionality and performance. If you choose to continue browsing this website, you consent to the use of cookies. Read our Privacy Policy here for details.