Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Quizno's Franchisees Can Proceed with Class Action
More than 3,000 Quizno's franchisees and former franchisee prospects will be able to proceed with their class action lawsuit, ruled Judge Wiley Y. Daniel, U.S. District Court in Colorado (Raymond Bonanno, et al. v. The Quiznos Franchise Company, LLC, et al.). On March 5, Daniel rejected the effort by Quizno's to dismiss the eight claims in the class action.
The franchisees filed the lawsuit in February 2006 state court in New Jersey, but it was moved to Colorado, where Quizno's is based. The lawsuit alleges that prospective franchisees collectively paid Quizno's $75 million in franchise fees, but opening stores was subject to corporate approval of their selected location. If they were unable to find a location approved by Quizno's, they would forfeit their franchise fee.
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 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.
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.
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.
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?