Menu
Blog Banner Image

The Franchise Memorandum

Posts from May 2022 - Issue 277.
Posted in Employment

After denying a motion to dismiss, a federal court in New Jersey has now refused to grant summary judgment to a franchisor on racial discrimination and other employment-related claims asserted by its franchisee’s employee. Ward v. Cottman Transmission Sys., LLC, 2022 WL 909637 (D.N.J. Mar. 29, 2022).

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook
Posted in Employment

A federal court in Illinois recently dismissed a franchisee employee’s Title VII hostile work environment and related Illinois state-law claims against the franchisor. Budzyn v. KFC Corp., 2022 WL 952746 (N.D. Ill., Mar. 30, 2022).

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook
Posted in Employment

A federal court in Illinois denied Subway’s motion to dismiss a claim that it violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) by failing to obtain a franchisee’s employee’s consent for the collection and possession of the employee’s fingerprints. Ronquillo v. Doctor’s Assocs., LLC, 2022 WL 1016600 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 4, 2022).

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook

A state court in Connecticut recently granted summary judgment to Days Inns Worldwide, Inc. in a slip and fall case. Lacertosa v. Days Inns Worldwide, Inc., 2022 WL 1051147 (Sup. Ct. Conn. Mar. 30, 2022).

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook

A federal court in New York recently granted Yum! Brands’ motion to dismiss ADA and New York State Human Rights Law claims brought against it by a customer of a Kentucky Fried Chicken franchise. Zuchengno v. FQSR, LLC, 2022 WL 1214406 (W.D.N.Y. Apr. 25, 2022).

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook
Posted in Contracts

A federal court in Florida looked to the explicit terms of the agreements when a franchisee alleged that a franchisor’s failure to provide ongoing support and assistance was in breach of contract. Show Me Hospitality, LLC v. Tim Hortons USA, Inc., 2022 WL 1182896 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 21, 2022).

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook

A Federal Court in Tennessee recently denied a franchisor’s motion for preliminary injunction and dissolved a temporary restraining order that had previously been put in place, because the franchisor could not demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of its claims, did not establish irreparable harm, and the customers of the defendant would be substantially harmed if the preliminary injunction were ordered. Freedom Franchise Sys., LLC v. CHOTO Boat Club LLC, 2022 WL 1206569 (E.D. Tenn. Apr. 21, 2022).

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook

About this Publication

The Franchise Memorandum is a collection of postings on summaries of recent legal developments of interest to franchisors brought to you by Lathrop GPM LLP. 

To subscribe to monthly emails for The Franchise Memorandum, please click here

Topics

Archives

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

Blog Authors