Schlam Stone & Dolan Partner Jeffrey M. Eilender Discusses Whether Contractual Disclaimers Can Waive Fraud Claim
The West Virginia Intermediate Court of Appeals reversed a decision that a national broker franchisor, Ameriprise Financial, Inc., fraudulently induced a franchisee into buying the business of another Ameriprise franchisee,...more
Federal courts have long recognized fraud in the inducement (also referred to as simply “fraudulent inducement”) (“FITI”) as an actionable theory of recovery under the False Claims Act (“FCA”). However, while loosely rooted...more
On May 22, 2025, in a significant decision that clarifies the scope of the federal wire fraud statute and resolves a circuit split, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a pair of wire fraud convictions that had been premised on a...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Kousisis et al. v. United States clarifies that criminal federal wire fraud does not require that the defendant intended to cause the victim economic harm....more
On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States (the Court) issued its opinion in Kousisis v. United States, holding that a defendant may be convicted of wire fraud for inducing a victim to enter a contract under...more
When an executive learns that she is being investigated for fraud, her first reaction often is: “But I didn’t intend for anyone to lose money!” This entirely understandable response may well be true (and lead the executive to...more
On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed prosecutors’ ability to pursue mail and wire fraud charges under the “fraudulent inducement” theory. Under that theory, a defendant need not intend to cause...more
Expanding on the peer review protections established in Bonni v. St. Joseph Health System, the California Court of Appeal in Dignity Health v. Mounts held that a wide array of medical staff communications regarding peer...more
A couple of months ago, we examined NW Media Holdings Corp. v. IBT Media Inc., 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 30875(U) (Sup. Ct., N.Y. County Mar. 22, 2023) (here), a case in which a lower court addressed the question whether the...more
The Tennessee Supreme Court recently issued an important decision making clear that in a breach of contract dispute, the aggrieved party may recover more in damages than the parties’ contract permits, such as punitive,...more
Welcome to The Franchise Memorandum by Lathrop GPM. Below are summaries of recent legal developments of interest to franchisors. Fifth Circuit Reverses Trial Court’s Excusal of Area Representative’s Tardy Renewal Notice -...more
Sister blog The LLC Jungle recently posted about an opinion from California’s Sixth District Court of Appeal — Orozco v. WPV San Jose, LLC — describing the legal difference between an LLC tenant, and the LLC’s owner who...more
Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 13(a) provides that “any question of law may be brought up for review and relief by any party.” Well, not always. In Melo Enterprises, LLC, et al. v. D1 Sports Holdings, LLC, Case No....more
• In Deasang Corp. v. NutraSweet Co., the Appellate Division overturned a ruling by a lower court vacating an arbitral award on the ground that the arbitral panel manifestly disregarded the law. The Appellate Division...more
Fisk Elec. Co. v. DQSI, L.L.C., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 17914 (5th Cir., June 29, 2018) - DQSI, L.L.C., (“DQSI”) a general contractor, was hired by the Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) for a pump station construction...more
Koudela v. Johnson & Johnson Custom Builders, LLC, 2017 Ohio App. Lexis 5800 (December 29, 2017) - In this case, Nicolas and Monica Koudela (the “Koudelas”) entered into a construction contract with “Johnson & Johnson...more