Menu
Blog Banner Image

The Franchise Memorandum

Two of Supplier's Antitrust Tying Claims Survive Franchisor's Motion to Dismiss
Posted in Antitrust

The United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky recently granted in part but denied in part a motion brought by tire retreading franchisor, Bridgestone Bandag, LLC, to dismiss a four-count complaint brought by Shamrock Marketing, Inc., alleging that Bandag implemented an unlawful tying arrangement in violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act. Shamrock Marketing, Inc. v. Bridgestone Bandag, LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25109 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 11, 2011). Shamrock is a family-owned Kentucky corporation that supplies “curing envelopes” and other accessories to tire retreading shops, including Bandag franchisees. It alleged that Bandag’s “Q-Fund,” which provides incentives to its franchisees to purchase curing envelopes and other accessories from Bandag, unlawfully ties the sale of precured tread rubber to the sale of Bandag curing envelopes and other Bandag accessories.

Noting that the motion “raises some difficult questions at the intersection of franchise agreements and antitrust enforcement,” the court denied Bandag’s motion to dismiss Counts II and III of Shamrock’s complaint, holding that Shamrock had standing and sufficiently pled an antitrust injury by alleging that the Q-Fund eliminated competition throughout the market for curing envelopes and accessories. The court granted Bandag’s motion to dismiss Counts I and IV, however, holding that Kodak-style lock-in claims were not appropriate in the franchise context and Shamrock’s alleged single-brand relevant tying market therefore failed to state a claim.

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

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

Blog Authors