The Franchise Memorandum
A federal court in Ohio recently held that a distributor adequately alleged the existence of a fiduciary relationship with a manufacturer.
A Kansas district court, applying Georgia law, recently denied a franchisor’s motion to dismiss a franchisee’s claim for breach of fiduciary duty. Lenexa Hotel, LP v. Holiday Hosp. Franchising, Inc., 2017 WL 2264358 (D. Kan. May 24, 2017). The franchisee, Lenexa, previously entered into a franchise licensing agreement with the franchisor, Holiday, to build and operate a Crowne Plaza hotel. In the agreement, Holiday represented that it would drive demand for the new hotel through its central reservation system and marketing resources. In its complaint, Lenexa alleged that ...
In another dealership case involving Audi brand automobiles, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York overturned a decision by a lower court and granted Audi of America, Inc. summary judgment on the plaintiffs’ fiduciary duty claims. Legend Autorama, Ltd. v. Audi of America, Inc., 2012 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7602 (N.Y. App. Div. Nov. 14, 2012). Audi and the plaintiffs, who were franchised Audi dealers, were parties to dealer agreements. After entering into the dealer agreements with the plaintiffs, Audi entered into another dealer agreement with a separate party that ...
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.