Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Court Watch
Wrongfully Terminated Franchisee's Damages Not Limited to Remedies Afforded Under California Franchise Relations Act
A California appellate court has ruled that a franchisee whose franchise agreement was terminated by the franchisor without good cause in violation of the California Franchise Relations Act (“CFRA”) may sue a franchisor for breach of contract damages based on wrongful termination. In permitting the suit, the court refused to enforce a franchise agreement provision permitting the franchisor to terminate the agreement with or without cause, holding that the provision violated the CFRA and was therefore void and unenforceable. But the court ruled that the franchisee could not sue the franchisor for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage as a result of the wrongful termination. JRS Products, Inc. v. Matsushita Electric Corporation of America, 8 Cal.Rptr.3d 840 (Cal. App. 3d 2004).
JRS Products, Inc. (“JRS”) was a Panasonic fax machine dealer. Panasonic retained the right under the dealer agreement to compete directly with JRS and to terminate the relationship on 90 days' notice with or without cause. In the late 1990s, Panasonic became dissatisfied because JRS began to sell remanufactured toner cartridges at lower prices than Panasonic charged for its new toner cartridges, and because JRS included a letter of authorization from Panasonic in its solicitation packages to market and sell the remanufactured goods. In 1997, and without warning to JRS, Panasonic decided to terminate dealers that were selling remanufactured goods.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.