News & Analysis as of

Appeals › Employer Liability Issues › Franchisors

Foley & Lardner LLP

Texas Supreme Court Limits Franchisor Liability in Franchisee Sexual Assault Case

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On May 2, 2025, the Texas Supreme Court held that a franchisor owes no duty of care for injuries caused by a franchisee’s employee unless the franchisor retained or exercised control over the hiring of that employee....more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Texas Supreme Court Reverses Liability Finding Against Franchisor

Fox Rothschild LLP on

A recent Texas Supreme Court decision fully overturned a jury’s finding that a franchisor was liable for the criminal actions of a franchisee’s employee. This decision underscores the importance of a franchisor having clearly...more

Polsinelli

Landmark Texas Supreme Court Case Finds No “Direct Liability” for Franchisor Arising Out of Franchisee Employee’s Actions

Polsinelli on

On May 2, 2025, the Texas Supreme Court reversed a Texas Court of Appeals’ decision that had affirmed a jury’s verdict finding a franchisor directly liable to the customer of a franchisee for actions undertaken by the...more

ArentFox Schiff

Lovin' It: Ninth Circuit Rules McDonald's is Not a Joint Employer with Franchisee in California

ArentFox Schiff on

In a case that should grab the attention of franchisors across the country, a panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ruled that McDonald’s Corporation is not the joint employer of the employees of a...more

ArentFox Schiff

Lovin' It: Ninth Circuit Rules McDonald's is Not a Joint Employer with Franchisee in California

ArentFox Schiff on

In a case that should grab the attention of franchisors across the country, a panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ruled that McDonald’s Corporation is not the joint employer of the employees of a...more

Lewitt Hackman

Franchisor 101: Franchisor Can Be Liable as “Employer” for Missclassifying Workers

Lewitt Hackman on

The Ninth Circuit sent shockwaves through the franchise industry in ruling that last year’s California Supreme Court decision broadening who may bring wage misclassification claims (Dynamex v. Superior Court) applied...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Fifth Circuit Allows Title VII Suit Against Franchisor to Proceed Even Though It Was Not Named in EEOC Charge

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

In order to sue under Title VII, plaintiffs must first file an administrative charge of discrimination against their employer with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. In many cases, the charge misnames the actual...more

7 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide