Menu
Blog Banner Image

The Franchise Memorandum

Court Enforces Noncompete Provision Against Successor

The United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri recently enforced a post-termination noncompete covenant against a former Alabama tax preparation franchisee and a business operated by the franchisee's spouse based on a theory of successor liability. H&R Block Tax Services, LLC v. Clayton, 2016 WL 1247205 (W.D. Mo. Mar. 24, 2016). Gray Plant Mooty represented the franchisor in this case. Following the termination of his franchise agreement for failure to pay royalties, the franchisee's husband opened a tax return preparation business in close proximity to the formerly franchised offices and used records from those offices to solicit clients. The new business also used the same trade name and telephone number as the formerly franchised business. H&R Block filed suit in Missouri under the forum selection clause of the franchise agreement and sought to enjoin both the former franchisee and his husband's business from violating the noncompete provision of the agreement.

In granting H&R Block's motion for a preliminary injunction, the court first held that the forum selection clause contained in the franchise agreement subjected both the former franchisee and the new business operated by his husband to personal jurisdiction in Missouri. The court reasoned that the new business was bound by all of the terms, covenants, and obligations incumbent upon the franchisee because the business was a successor-in-interest to, and a continuation of, the franchisee's business. The court further held that H&R Block was likely to succeed on the merits of its claim that the former franchisee and the new business had breached the noncompete provision and that the provision was reasonable and enforceable under Missouri law, which governed the contract. Concluding that H&R Block would suffer irreparable harm to its goodwill and its ability to establish a new tax return preparation office in the area where the former franchisee had operated, the court enjoined the franchisee, his husband's competing business, and anyone acting in concert with them from violating the noncompete covenant contained in the franchise agreement.

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