Blog

Legal Life after the Coronavirus Death for Small Businesses, Franchisees and Dealers By: Jeffrey M. Goldstein  www.goldlawgroup.com Second in a Series: COVID-19 HAS KILLED MY BUSINESS – MAY I LEGALLY TERMINATE MY CONTRACTS? Those who hope or believe that the consequences, effects, and sources of COVID-19 will soon be arrested and contained might be wondering whether their inability to have complied with their contracts, leases, and mortgages during this waiting period can lead to a subsequent termination of or suit under their agreements for failure to have fully complied with all of the contractual obligations in these contracts. Although I don’t anticipate that ‘other parties to your contracts’ individually or as a group are preparing or conspiring to terminate, default, or cancel anyone’s agreements, this does not rule out the high probability that when things return to normal (when market forces begin to work again unimpeded by the myriad current external shocks), every firm will naturally begin to focus again on ‘maximizing profits’ – the legitimate and necessary goal of individual suppliers in a free market economy. In general, whether you’re able to use COVID-19 as a legal ‘excuse’ for your inability to pay or otherwise perform during the coronavirus downtime is subject to whether the agreement in issue contains a provision or language that excuses your performance for unanticipated or unforeseen events. While many agreements contain such clauses, referred to as ‘force majeure’ clauses (clauses that excuse performance based on unexpected events such as floods, epidemics, riots, wars, etc.), […]

Read More

The coronavirus (COVID-19) (“the Virus”) has made it impossible or impracticable for many businesses to comply with their contracts. The party who must ultimately bear the loss associated with the Virus largely depends on whether the explicit language in their contract contains a ‘force majeure’ clause. In the absence of such language, liability for the non-performance will turn upon the law of ‘impossibility’ in the applicable jurisdiction. Not only has the Virus physically disabled those responsible for meeting contractual obligations, but it also has caused many state and local authorities to issue orders banning or severely restricting association, gatherings and travel, for instance, which, in turn, create such impossibility or impracticability. The evolution of the Virus, as well as government and business responses thereto (quarantine and containment orders), has caused many businessmen, and lawyers in unrelated niches, to ask whether any legal excuses exist to discharge promisors from contractual obligations impacted by the Virus. As discussed below, and as will be discussed in more detail in subsequent articles in this series, businesses, including franchisees, distributors and dealers, who find themselves unable to meet certain obligations in their contracts, should seek legal assistance to determine whether force majeure or the common law of impossibility or impracticability excuses their contractual performance. While force majeure generally refers to unforeseeable “acts of God,” impossibility is a broad-sweeping doctrine that picks up events and occurrences that arguably substantially impede performance even though they are not nature related (e.g., blindness or death of famous artist in […]

Read More

Even though many industries have been devastated by COVID-19, the Antitrust Division in the Department of Justice has publicly warned all companies that they still are ‘being watched’ by government trust-busters. The DOJ Press Release singles out manufacturers and distributors of health products such as face masks, respirators, and diagnostics. Search form Search ABOUT OUR AGENCY PRIORITIES NEWS RESOURCES CAREERS CONTACT You are here Home » Office of Public Affairs » News SHARE JUSTICE NEWS Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, March 9, 2020 Justice Department Cautions Business Community Against Violating Antitrust Laws in the Manufacturing, Distribution, and Sale of Public Health Products The Department of Justice today announced its intention to hold accountable anyone who violates the antitrust laws of the United States in connection with the manufacturing, distribution, or sale of public health products such as face masks, respirators, and diagnostics.  The department’s announcement is part of a broader administration effort to ensure that federal, state, and local health authorities, the private healthcare sector, and the public at large are in the strongest possible position to respond to the outbreak of the respiratory disease named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). “The Department of Justice stands ready to make sure that bad actors do not take advantage of emergency response efforts, healthcare providers, or the American people during this crucial time,” said Attorney General William P. Barr.  “I am committed to ensuring that the department’s resources are available to combat any wrongdoing and protect the public.” Individuals or companies […]

Read More

When you bought your franchise, the last thing you expected was that you would end up in a dispute with your franchisor. You had a good relationship with the people you talked to, you were excited about the opportunity, and it seemed like everyone was on the same page. But now, the relationship has soured, you aren’t happy with your outlet’s financial performance, and you find yourself in need of a franchise dispute lawyer. What happens now? Coming to Terms with Your Franchisor There are a number of potential ways to resolve franchise disputes, and the options that are available depend on the specific facts and circumstances involved. For example, if you have received a notice of termination, you may need to act more quickly – and your options may be more limited – than if you were facing a dispute with regard to something like advertising approvals or adopting an expensive new point-of-sale system. 1. Attempting to Negotiate a Mutually-Agreeable Resolution Generally speaking, however, your first option will be to attempt to negotiate a mutually-agreeable resolution. Is there a misunderstanding that simply needs to be cleared up? Is it in both parties’ best interests to quickly find a way forward? If so, then your chances of negotiating an outcome that you can live with might be fairly good. Negotiating doesn’t have to mean sitting down in a board room and going toe-to-toe. In fact, in many cases, issues can be resolved with an email exchange or a few phone […]

Read More

In January 2020, Franchise Direct published two articles, A Look at How Franchises Impact the Economy and Franchising by the Numbers, that provide a nice overview of the current state of the franchise industry. Here, franchise attorney Jeffrey M. Goldstein covers some of the highlights: 1. There are More than 750,000 Franchises in the U.S. with More than 8 Million Employees According to Franchise Direct, as of January 2020, “[i]n the United States, over 750,000 franchise establishments are operating and employ around 8.17 million people.” Franchise Direct also reports that another 13.3 million jobs are “supported by franchises.” Citing the most-recent economic data, Franchise Direct reports that gross revenue from franchisees topped $868 billion in 2016, compared with $675 billion a decade earlier. 2. Food Continues to Dominate the Franchise Industry Across all sectors, food establishments accounted for the most employment in franchising, providing just under 473,000 jobs across the country. Based on global sales data, the three most-successful U.S.-based franchises are McDonalds, 7-Eleven, and KFC. 3. Franchise Ownership Demographics are Shifting It used to be that the majority of franchise owners were middle-aged or older, and typically seeking to transition out of an unfulfilling job or use their career experience to build their own business. While this is still the case today, Franchise Direct reports that 12 percent of franchisees are now 34 years of age or younger, and more than half of franchisees (54 percent) own two or more outlets. 4.  Franchising is Expected to Continue Its Upward […]

Read More

On February 7, 2020, the International Franchise Association (IFA) published an article expressing its strong opposition to the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act (H.R. 2474), which passed in the U.S. House of Representatives on February 6. The PRO Act proposes to codify the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) joint-employer standard adopted in its highly-controversial Browning-Ferris decision from 2015. It would also adopt certain aspects of the California state court decision of Dynamex Operations West v. Superior Court, which created a so-called “ABC” test for determining whether an individual should be classified as an independent contractor or an employee. According to the IFA: “This bill would pose a massive threat to America’s 733,000 franchise businesses and the 7.6 million workers they employ. Already, the joint employer standard that this bill seeks to codify has cost the franchise industry $33.3 billion per year and led to a 93% increase in joint employment litigation. . . . [The PRO Act] could have the detrimental impact of turning every franchise owner into a de-facto employee of the brand.” The Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act (H.R. 2474) In its current form, the PRO Act, if enacted, would create a new standard for joint employment that follows the NLRB’s Browning-Ferris decision. In pertinent part, H.R. 2474 states: “Section 2(2) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 152(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ‘Two or more persons shall be employers with respect to an employee if each such […]

Read More

A recent article on 1851franchise.com discusses three ways that artificial intelligence (A.I.) has already made its way into the franchise industry, with a particularly-high adoption rate in the restaurant sector. Start-ups and well-established franchised brands are utilizing A.I. in a variety of ways—and they are forcing their franchisees to utilize A.I. as well. As a current (or prospective) franchisee, what do you need to know about the franchise industry’s acceptance of A.I. as a business development tool, risk mitigation tool and go-to-market strategy? Here are answers to some commonly-asked questions from national franchise attorney Jeffrey M. Goldstein: Q: How are Franchisors Requiring Franchisees to Make Use of A.I.? While artificial intelligence as something other than a sci-fi fantasy is still difficult for many people to grasp, the truth is that many companies are already using A.I. in many different ways. Within franchising, companies are utilizing A.I. for everything from tracking (and responding to) consumer sentiment to taking orders in-person and online. Q: Who Bears the Cost of Adopting New A.I. Technologies? Predictably, franchisors are forcing franchisees to bear the cost of adopting new A.I. technologies. Franchisors almost universally reserve the right to require franchisees to adopt system “updates” at their own expense, and most franchise agreements do not place any limits on the nature, frequency or cost of updates franchisors can require. Q: Can Franchisors Force Franchisees to Abandon Old Technologies in Favor of A.I.? In most cases, yes. Uniformity and “standards” are hallmarks of the franchise system, and franchisors […]

Read More

Lots of franchisors claim to offer “recession-proof” franchises. The basic idea behind this claim is that the products or services their franchisees offer either: (i) are so essential that people will need to pay for them no matter what, or (ii) come into even higher demand when the economy takes a downturn. While both of these make sense in theory, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that no franchise opportunity guarantees success. Even if your business is capable of surviving during a recession, this does not mean that it will survive during a recession (or even during more prosperous times). Recession-Resistant Franchise Sectors Perhaps, then, the term “recession-proof” isn’t quite as apt as “recession-resistant.” A recent article on Entrepreneur.com uses this term to describe five franchise sectors that might be less susceptible to economic contraction: Restoration Services – “[C]ompanies in the restoration business will always have customers. . . . Plus, much of the work is paid for through various types of insurance so the bulk of the bill may not fall to the homeowner.” Senior Home Care – America is getting older . . . [and] [s]enior home care allows . . . non-medical caregivers to come to seniors’ homes and help them with everyday chores they aren’t able to do themselves for a fraction of what senior living communities would charge.” Hair Care – “People may cut back on some personal grooming services, but hair care is rarely one of them. . . . […]

Read More

As we recently discussed, franchisors typically reserve broad rights to require franchisees to adopt system changes at their own expense. A case filed in federal district court last year confirms that franchisors who include the necessary protections in their franchise agreements can mandate expensive system changes – even if the changes are undesirable to franchisees. JDS Group v. Metal Supermarkets Franchising Am., Inc. In the case of JDS Group v. Metal Supermarkets Franchising Am., Inc. (WD New York June 20, 2017), JDS Group challenged its franchisor’s requirement to replace outdated point-of-sale (POS) software with a new application it intended to implement system-wide. Despite three years of development and a total cost in excess of $1 million, JDS Group alleged that the new POS software did not function as it should. It also submitted declarations from six other franchisees complaining of serious issues with the software. Although JDS Group’s franchise agreement gave Metal Supermarkets Franchising Am., Inc. the right to mandate use of specific POS software applications, it alleged that the mandate to adopt ineffective software constituted a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and violated the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act (FIPA). Under FIPA, franchisors have an obligation to deal with their franchisees in good faith, and they cannot require franchisees to adopt system changes unless the changes are justified on business grounds. The franchisor countered that the vast majority of its franchisees, “had not been forced to close their stores,” as a result of […]

Read More

Buying a franchise is an expensive proposition. From the initial franchise fee to the reserve capital you will need for your first six to twelve months of operations, as a prospective franchisee, every penny matters. With this in mind, do you really need to speak with a franchise lawyer before you buy? If you have already made up your mind, what is the benefit of having someone review the Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD) and franchise agreement? Unfortunately, many prospective franchisees attempt to save money by foregoing a legal review, and their decision ends up costing them substantially in the years to come. 10 Reasons to Hire a Franchise Lawyer Before You Sign There are numerous reasons why all prospective franchisees should seek legal representation. Here are 10 examples: You Need to Make Sure You are Making an Informed Decision. Have you read and understood the entire FDD? What about the franchise agreement? Have you conducted adequate due diligence? Your Franchisor May be Providing Incomplete Information. Franchisors have sales funnels, and their goal is to get you to sign on the dotted line. Are you sure you have the complete story about your franchise opportunity? There Are Hidden Risks to Buying a Franchise. Is the franchisor at risk for bankruptcy or litigation? Could it lose the exclusive right to use its trademark? You Need to Know Your Obligations. Can you buy from any source you choose, or are you limited to approved products and approved suppliers? Your Franchisor Probably Has Broad […]

Read More