The Ninth Circuit has affirmed a district court’s order for specific performance requiring the franchisor to renew the franchise agreement at the existing royalty rate. Prudence Corp. v. Shred-It America, Inc., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 3214 (9th Cir. Feb. 11, 2010). Although the court does not fully explain, it appears to have based its decision on findings that Shred-It breached the franchise agreement by waiting over a year to “timely submit proposed renewal terms” to Prudence. The court also held that specific performance was an appropriate remedy because the franchise agreement called for it whenever a party “improperly withholds its approval of any action.”
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.
RSS Feed