Menu
Blog Banner Image

The Franchise Memorandum

The Franchise Memorandum

Posts in Jury Demand and Waiver.

A magistrate judge for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan has denied, without prejudice, a motion to strike an untimely demand for a jury trial made by a group of franchisees. L.A. Insurance Agency Franchising, LLC v. Montes, 2015 WL 9314738 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 23, 2015). The franchisees waited until five months after filing their answer to the complaint to assert their demand for a jury. L.A. Insurance, the franchisor, then sought to strike the jury demand, arguing that the franchisees had waived their right to a jury because each franchise agreement ...

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook

In Dunkin’ Donuts Franchising, LLC, v. SAI Food and Hospitality, LLC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 359472 (E.D. Mo. Mar. 15, 2013), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri granted Dunkin’s motion to strike the franchisees’ jury demand, and their request for punitive damages and lost profits. Gray Plant Mooty represents the franchisor in this case. The court enforced the mutual jury trial waiver contained in the parties’ contracts on the basis that it was unambiguous and conspicuous. In addition, the court noted that the franchisees were experienced ...

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook

The United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin recently upheld the jury waiver provision in a franchise agreement under the Wisconsin Fair Dealership Law (WFDL). In Novus Franchising, Inc. v. Superior Entrance Systems, Inc., et al., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115640 (W.D. Wis. August 15, 2012), Novus Franchising and defendants Superior Entrance Systems, Inc. (SES) and Knute Pedersen were parties to a franchise agreement for the operation of a Novus business. Although SES’s affiliate, defendant Superior Glass, Inc. (SGI), did not sign the franchise ...

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook

In Andre v. Sellstate Realty Sys. Network, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84853 (M.D. Fla. July 30, 2010), the franchisor moved to strike the franchisees’ jury trial demand based upon the following language in two promissory notes: “THE AREA REPRESENTATIVE, BY SIGNING OF THIS NOTE, AND THE FRANCHISOR, BY ACCEPTANCE OF THIS NOTE, MUTUALLY AND WILLINGLY WAIVE THE RIGHT TO A TRIAL BY JURY OF ALL CLAIMS BETWEEN THEM . . . .” The franchisees objected, arguing that the promissory notes were ancillary to their claims that the franchisor had made fraudulent representations and induced them ...

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook

A Connecticut federal court granted a franchisor’s motion to strike a jury demand in Sherman Street Associates, LLC, et al. v. JTH Tax, Inc., et al.  2010 LEXIS 29402 (D. Conn. Mar. 22, 2010).  Although the franchise agreements contained a jury waiver provision, the franchisee demanded a jury trial on its claims under the Connecticut Franchise Act and for tortious interference. 

The franchisor moved to strike the jury demand, pointing to the jury waiver provisions in the franchise agreements, which the franchisee contended were not enforceable under the CFA. 

The court found that ...

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