News & Analysis as of

Franchisors Negligence TX Supreme Court

Lewitt Hackman

Franchisor 101: Duty of Care

Lewitt Hackman on

The Texas Supreme Court reversed a lower court’s decision against a franchisor based on a theory of negligence after a customer was assaulted by an employee of the franchisee. The court concluded that franchisor did not owe a...more

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

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

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

4 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