CFIL – Page 2 – Franchise Focus

Handel’s Enterprises, Inc. v. Schulenburg: In Spite of a “Willful” Violation of the CFIL, a Federal Court Finds a Franchisee is not Entitled to Rescission

Jan 6, 2020Legal AlertsCalifornia, CFIL

Executive Summary: In a reported decision, Judge Barker of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio found that in order to successfully rescind a franchise agreement under the California Franchise Investment Law a franchisee must prove that the violation was willful and the plaintiff relied on the violation in entering into the contract and that the violation caused damages. Citation: Handel’s […]

Handoush v. Lease Finance Group, LLC: Predispute Waivers put a Forum Selection Clause at Issue Again

Oct 31, 2019Legal AlertsCalifornia, CFIL

Executive Summary: In a reported decision, Judge Wick of the California Court of Appeal, First District, Division 3, found that the forum selection clause in a contract between plaintiff and defendant was invalid based on a predispute jury waiver. Citation: Handoush v. Lease Finance Group, LLC, 41 Cal.App.5th 729 (2019). Relevant Background: On January 21, 2016, Zeaad Handoush (“Plaintiff”) filed suit […]

Campbell v. FAF, Inc. et al.: A Costly Lesson Related To Notice Pleading The Existence of a Franchise

Jun 20, 2019Legal AlertsCalifornia, CFIL

Executive Summary: In an unreported decision, Judge Hayes of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California decided a Motion to Transfer that defendants’ filed based on a forum selection clause in an “Independent Contractor Operating Agreement” (“Agreement”). Plaintiff argued enforcement of the forum selection clause violated public policy–as codified by the California Franchise Investment Law (“CFIL”). Defendants […]

United Studios of Self Defense v. Rinehart: Lessons in Legal Jiu-Jitsu by a Franchisor Under Attack

Feb 22, 2019Legal AlertsCalifornia, CFIL

Executive Summary: In an unreported decision, Judge Carter of the United States District Court for the Central District of California denied Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike and granted in part Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss certain counterclaims against it. While not entirely novel, the critical lessons from the case include just how long a State enforcement action against a franchisor can be used […]