Menu
Blog Banner Image

The Franchise Memorandum

Court Awards Attorneys' Fees to Franchisor That Prevailed on Motion for Preliminary Injunction
Posted in Damages

In Novus Franchising, Inc. v. Oksendahl, 2008 WL 835681 (D. Minn. March 27, 2008), the court awarded attorneys’ fees to a franchisor that prevailed on a motion for preliminary injunction against a former franchisee. Gray Plant Mooty represented the franchisor. The parties’ franchise agreement provided that the “prevailing party” on a motion for injunctive relief would be awarded its attorneys’ fees. Relying on that language, the franchisor sought an award of fees from the court. The franchisee claimed, however, that it actually was the prevailing party, as the court had not awarded the franchisor all the relief sought through its motion for preliminary injunction. The franchisee claimed that the court must determine who was the prevailing party under Idaho law, not under the definition supplied by the contract.

The court rejected the franchisee’s argument and found the franchisor to be the prevailing party as defined by the franchise agreement. The court found that the parties’ contract unambiguously defined the phrase “prevailing party” as the party that obtained injunctive relief. The court declined the franchisee’s request to interpret Idaho law to trump the parties’ clear contractual intent. The court did, however, reduce the amount of fees awarded to the franchisor to reflect the court’s previous decision to grant only a portion of the injunctive relief sought.

Email LinkedIn Twitter Facebook

The information contained in this post is provided to alert you to legal developments and should not be considered legal advice. It is not intended to and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Specific questions about how this information affects your particular situation should be addressed to one of the individuals listed. No representations or warranties are made with respect to this information, including, without limitation, as to its completeness, timeliness, or accuracy, and Lathrop GPM shall not be liable for any decision made in connection with the information. The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely on advertisements.

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

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

Blog Authors