A federal court in Missouri granted H&R Block Tax Services, LLC’s motion for summary judgment, holding that H&R Block properly terminated Colorado Tax Specialists Co.’s franchise agreements after Colorado Tax disclosed confidential information without required safeguards. Colorado Tax Specialists Co. v. H&R Block Tax Servs., LLC, 2026 WL 973283 (W.D. Mo. Apr. 10, 2026).
Colorado Tax operated H&R Block offices under two franchise agreements. After H&R Block terminated the agreements without providing an opportunity to cure, Colorado Tax sued for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and unjust enrichment, alleging that H&R Block terminated the agreements for manufactured and retaliatory reasons and without providing required notice. The court granted summary judgment to H&R Block on these claims.
The court concluded that the undisputed record showed Colorado Tax failed to comply with the agreements’ confidentiality provisions. The agreements required Colorado Tax to have any associates, employees, agents, or independent contractors with access to confidential information sign confidentiality agreements and prohibited Colorado Tax from making confidential information available to unauthorized persons without H&R Block’s prior written consent. Colorado Tax shared client data and other confidential information with employees of third-party company Synergy Tax Solutions, including client QuickBooks access, client payroll information, client IRS communications, and a client tracker. Colorado Tax did not obtain H&R Block’s written consent or signed confidentiality agreements from the Synergy employees before sharing the confidential information. The court held that this breach allowed H&R Block to terminate the agreements immediately and without an opportunity to cure under the agreements’ express termination provision. Because H&R Block acted within its contractual rights, the court also rejected Colorado Tax’s implied covenant claim. Likewise, Colorado Tax’s unjust enrichment claim failed because the parties’ express agreements governed the dispute.