A federal court recently determined that a franchisee's affirmative defenses were barred by the doctrine of res judicata. In KFC Corp. v. Kazi, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138278 (W.D. Ky. Sept. 30, 2014), KFC sought to recover past-due money from Kazi, the guarantor and sole shareholder of four franchisees that operated 142 terminated KFC units. Kazi asserted affirmative defenses attacking the franchisees' liability to KFC. The franchisor argued Kazi's defenses were barred because they were, or should have been, litigated during prior bankruptcy proceedings involving the franchisees.
For the doctrine of res judicata to apply, there must have been (1) a final decision on the merits; (2) a subsequent action between the same parties; (3) an issue in the subsequent action that was litigated or should have been litigated in the prior action; and (4) a similar core of operative facts or transactions. The court held, first, that the order of a sale in the bankruptcy proceedings constituted a final decision on the merits. Second, the case at bar involved the same parties from the prior bankruptcy proceedings—KFC as a creditor of the franchisees and Kazi as the sole shareholder of the franchisees and guarantor of their debts. Regarding the third prong, the court found that Kazi had unsuccessfully raised, or should have raised, the affirmative defenses attacking KFC's pre-bankruptcy conduct in the bankruptcy proceedings because "those claims would have a direct effect on the assets in the bankruptcy proceeding." Finally, the court had no doubt that the defenses arose from the same transactions giving rise to Kazi's liability under the guaranties.
- Partner
Maisa Frank represents clients in a variety of litigation matters. Whether conducting pre-dispute investigations, navigating litigation, or negotiating resolutions, Maisa’s advice and strategy is vital to clients facing ...
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.