News & Analysis as of

Franchisee Franchisors Employment Litigation

Lathrop GPM

Supreme Court of Texas Holds Franchisor Lacked Control Over Franchisee Sufficient to Create Duty of Care to Customer that Alleged...

Lathrop GPM on

The Supreme Court of Texas recently ruled that franchisor Massage Heights did not owe a duty of care to a massage customer who alleged a sexual assault, because, among other reasons, Massage Heights had neither the...more

CDF Labor Law LLP

[Webinar] What is Happening at the NLRB? What Companies Should Know - October 24th, 10:00 am - 11:00 am PT

CDF Labor Law LLP on

Join CDF partners John Giovannone and Carolina Schwalbach for a one-hour in-depth review of the recent McLaren Macomb, Cemex and Stericycle NLRB decisions and their potential impact on union and non-union employers. If you...more

Lathrop GPM

Maine Federal Court Grants Franchisor’s Motion to Dismiss Age Discrimination Claim Brought by Franchisee’s Independent Contractor

Lathrop GPM on

A federal court in Maine granted a franchisor’s motion to dismiss claims asserting that a franchisor was liable for its franchisee’s alleged age discrimination in employment. Goodwill v. Anywhere Real Est., 2023 WL 4034372...more

Lewitt Hackman

Franchisee 101: No Joint Employer, No Cry

Lewitt Hackman on

A federal district court in New York dismissed workplace harassment and retaliation claims against corporate affiliates of the Golden Krust Caribbean Bakery & Grill franchisor for damages as a result of workplace harassment...more

Lewitt Hackman

Franchisor 101: Salon Franchisor Weaved into Joint Employment Claims

Lewitt Hackman on

A Michigan federal district court denied a franchisor’s motion to dismiss claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Michigan law, and claims alleging retaliatory termination and sexually hostile work...more

Lathrop GPM

Ninth Circuit Affirms Decision that Franchisees Are Not Employees of Franchisor

Lathrop GPM on

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed a decision that a group of franchisees are not employees of their franchisor, even though the trial court failed to apply the correct test. Haitayan v. 7-Eleven, Inc., 2022...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Eleventh Circuit Serves a Whopper of a Ruling on Franchisor’s ‘No-Poach’/‘No-Hire’ Agreement With Franchisees

​​​​​​​Over the last several years, business-to-business “no-hire” and “no-poach” agreements have come under legal attack, including through enforcement actions by the Federal Trade Commission and criminal prosecutions by the...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Rules that Independent Contractor Test Applies to Franchisees

Foley Hoag LLP on

On March 24, 2022, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) ruled in Patel v. 7-Eleven that the test for independent contractor status set forth in the Massachusetts independent contractor statute applies to the...more

BCLP

New California Law Disrupts Franchise Relationships

BCLP on

Winter is coming for franchisors in California.  Last year, the California Supreme Court decided to hold California businesses liable for the violation of Massachusetts labor statutes when it adopted the ABC test for...more

9 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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide