Menu
Blog Banner Image

The Franchise Memorandum

New York Appellate Court Upholds Claim of Oral Distribution Agreement Against Supplier
Posted in Contracts

A New York appellate court has rejected a statute of frauds defense to a claim for breach of oral exclusive distribution agreements. Last Time Beverage Corp. v. F & V Distribution Co., LLC, 2012 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6092 (N.Y. App. Div. Sept. 12, 2012). This case began when two separate groups of soft drink distributors sued their common supplier for several breaches of the distribution agreement between one group of distributors (Last Time Beverage) and the original franchisor. The distributors alleged that the supplier had changed their distribution rights without additional compensation, directly sold to distributors’ customers, improperly transshipped products, and unreasonably withheld consent to distributor sales of franchises. A referee appointed by the court found F & V Distribution liable to Last Time Beverage for breaching several contract provisions, including the provisions giving the distributors exclusive rights to distribute certain beverages in designated territories.

The second group of distributors, J.C. Tea, did not have a written agreement with F & V Distribution. Instead, they relied on oral and written promises that, among other things, they would receive contracts giving them exclusive rights in their geographic territories. F & V Distribution argued that the statute of frauds prevented J.C. Tea from asserting a claim for breach of an oral contract. The court ruled, however, that the doctrine of partial performance removed the oral agreement from the statute of frauds because J.C. Tea’s actions were “unequivocally referable” to the oral agreement. The court determined that J.C. Tea performed substantial obligations based on F & V Distribution’s alleged oral promises and that the promises were articulated in express terms set forth in the distribution agreements that governed Last Time Beverage. Thus, the court affirmed the oral agreements and held that the statute of frauds did not apply.

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