<i>Simon v. Starbucks</i>: Preliminary Injunction Granted to Prevent Store Closings

While the court will not have the opportunity to rule on the merits of the case, the facts relied upon by the Indiana Superior Court and the conclusions reached in rendering its decision are still instructive for practitioners drafting continuous-use provisions and advising clients on potential breaches or anticipatory breaches of such provisions.

11 minute read April 01, 2018 at 12:07 AM
By
Marisa L. Byram
<i>Simon v. Starbucks</i>: Preliminary Injunction Granted to Prevent Store Closings

On Nov. 27, 2017, the Marion County Superior Court in Indiana granted Simon Property Group, L.P. (Simon) a preliminary injunction prohibiting Starbucks Corporation from “(a) Failing to occupy and conduct business as usual in the leased premises for any of the Teavana stores at any Simon shopping center owned in whole or in part or managed by Simon, including any failure to be open and operating during normal business hours, as required by the Leases; and (b) Conducting, promoting, or advertising any fire, 'going out of business,' or similar sale, as prohibited by any of the Leases.”

This premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

Most firms are aiming their newest tools at the work they already do — pouring their most powerful technology into running the same tasks a little faster. But when everyone automates the same tasks at once, no one pulls ahead. That reaches the future a little faster while leaving a firm’s largest opportunity untouched — and that opportunity isn’t doing more of the existing work, but transforming how the high-value work gets done.

June 01, 2026

Artificial intelligence is rapidly embedding itself into legal workflows, but much of the conversation treats all use cases as if they carry the same level of risk, even if they do not. The more useful question is not whether AI works, but where it can be safely applied and where it cannot.

June 01, 2026