Blog Banner Image

The Franchise Memorandum

Dismissal Granted in Part and Denied in Part on Franchise System Distributor’s Claims Relating to E. Coli Outbreak in 2006
Posted in Contracts

McLane Foodservice, Inc., a regional distributor of raw produce to Taco Bell restaurants, was named as a defendant in several customer lawsuits arising out of a 2006 E. coli outbreak that was allegedly traced to lettuce served at the restaurants. McLane subsequently filed suit against Ready Pac Produce, Inc., who processed produce for Taco Bell, and Tanimura & Antle, Inc., the entity that procured the raw produce processed by Ready Pac. McLane sought to recover inventories, profits, and goodwill that it lost as a result of the outbreak. McLane also asserted claims for indemnification and contribution for money it spent defending and settling the E. coli lawsuits. In McLane Foodservice, Inc. v. Ready Pac Produce, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89087 (D.N.J. June 27, 2012), the court granted portions of Tanimura’s motion to dismiss certain counts alleged by McLane.

The court granted Tanimura’s motion to dismiss McLane’s claim for breach of a supplier agreement for the franchise system. The court held that, even if McLane could claim third-party beneficiary status under the contract, Tanimura could not be held liable because it was not a party to that agreement. With respect to a Safe Produce Guarantee signed by the supplier, the court found that the complaint did not state any facts that could lead to the possible conclusion that the parties intended McLane to have contractual rights thereunder. McLane’s quasi contract and unjust enrichment claims also failed, because the complaint did not contain necessary allegations that McLane reasonably expected compensation for defending and settling the legal actions, or that Tanimura accepted those benefits. In addition, the court denied the motion to dismiss McLane’s claims for negligence and breach of the implied warranty of merchantability.

This case demonstrates the complexity of liability issues when a food safety incident occurs within a franchise system.

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




















Blog Authors