Franchising & Distribution Law Blog

Subscribe

Blog Editors

Topics

Archives

Posts tagged franchise agreements.
By Daniel Garner on July 16, 2020 at 5:00 PM

Greensfelder summer associate Kiran Jeevanjee contributed to this blog post.

Native American tribes occupy a unique position within the American legal system, and understanding these issues is vital for any franchisor considering a tribe as a potential franchisee. Federally recognized Native American tribes are classified as “domestic dependent nations” — meaning that the tribes are considered “distinct independent political communities” and can govern their own internal affairs. The most important consequence of this classification from a business perspective is that such tribes are entitled to tribal sovereign immunity that protects them from any civil suits or criminal prosecutions to which they did not consent.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Dawn Johnson, Dominique de Vastey on January 30, 2018 at 12:48 PM

Signature line on a piece of paperA Georgia federal court recently found that a person who did not sign a franchise agreement was nevertheless bound by it. That was good news for a franchisor caught between two parties who claimed no responsibility for violating the franchise agreement by opening a competing business in the same franchise location. 

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Dawn Johnson on September 11, 2017 at 11:12 AM

"Unfair" with the "un" crossed out and "fair" underlined showing unfair is now fairA recent federal appeals court decision overturning a $6.5 million jury verdict for a franchisee on a state franchise law discrimination claim demonstrates once again the difficulty that franchisees face in such challenges, even when the court finds that the franchisor treated some franchisees differently than others in some instances and could not explain why.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Dawn Johnson, Dominique de Vastey on September 8, 2017 at 9:40 AM

Magnifying glass showing the word "contract" on a piece of paperDespite arguably conflicting terms in a franchise agreement, a franchisor could enforce a non-compete provision whenever the agreement ended, whether by termination or expiration. An arbitrator reached that conclusion by harmonizing two provisions in the franchise agreement that referenced a non-compete obligation — one that referenced termination and one that referenced both termination and expiration. This was a reasonable interpretation of the contract, according to the Maryland federal district court that found no basis to upset the arbitration award.

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.