Blog

Immediate Opening For Third Year Law Student or Recent Graduate Small litigation boutique in Washington, DC with national practice seeks Third Year Law Student for part-time work. This will involve litigation assignments including pleadings preparation. Practice is national, and contact with partner and clients is almost exclusively by internet, phone and email. Hourly rates are negotiable based on experience.  The estimated hourly hours per week are 10-15. A commitment through the end of the school year is required. Interested in Applying? Interested candidates should be ready to begin work immediately, and express interest by sending a copy via Email of a letter of interest, your resume and two writing samples to: Jeffrey Goldstein; Goldstein Law Firm 1629 K ST. N.W. Suite 300 Washington D.C., 20006 jgoldstein@goldlawgroup.com goldlawgroup.com 202-293-3947 About The Goldstein Law Firm The Goldstein Law Firm is one of only four national franchise law firms in the country that represents exclusively franchisees and dealers. Jeff Goldstein’s practice covers prolific and myriad commercial complex litigation matters, and Jeff is regularly sought out by franchisees and dealers from foreign countries (e.g., UAE, South America, United Kingdom) to represent them in disputes with United States franchisors and suppliers. Under the formation, growth and supervision of Jeff Goldstein, the law firm is recognized as a top tier franchise law firm for franchisees and dealers.

Read More

Immediate Opening For Second or Third Year Law Student or Recent Graduate Small litigation boutique in Washington, DC with national practice seeks Second or Third Year Law Student for short legal research and writing assignments. Employment could lead to litigation assignments including pleadings preparation. Practice is national, and contact with clients is almost exclusively by internet, phone and email. Similarly, assignments and contact with applicant by Firm will be by internet, phone and email. Hourly rates are negotiable based on experience.  The estimated hourly hours per week are 10. A commitment through the end of the school year is encouraged. Interested in Applying? Interested candidates should be ready to begin work immediately, and express interest by sending a copy via Email only of your resume and two writing samples to: Jeffrey Goldstein; Goldstein Law Firm 1629 K ST. N.W. Suite 300 Washington D.C., 20006 jgoldstein@goldlawgroup.com goldlawgroup.com 202-293-3947 About The Goldstein Law Firm The Goldstein Law Firm is one of only four national franchise law firms in the country that represents exclusively franchisees and dealers. Jeff Goldstein’s practice covers prolific and myriad commercial complex litigation matters, and Jeff is regularly sought out by franchisees and dealers from foreign countries (e.g., UAE, South America, United Kingdom) to represent them in disputes with United States franchisors and suppliers. Under the formation, growth and supervision of Jeff Goldstein, the law firm is recognized as a top tier franchise law firm for franchisees and dealers.

Read More

If you are in the process of performing your due diligence on a franchise opportunity, you are probably struggling to comprehend the seemingly-unending legalese in the franchise agreement. Indeed, even the best franchise lawyer struggles to interpret what the drafters intended when they wrote some of the language in many of these agreement templates that, frankly, should have been overhauled long, long ago. That said, most franchise agreement provisions can be interpreted, and the news often is not good for prospective franchisees. Based on more than 30 years of franchise law experience, here are 10 of the absolute worst provisions in franchise agreements: 1. Mandatory Mediation and Arbitration. We’ll start with a big one: Many franchise agreements contain provisions that require franchisees to submit all disputes to mediation or arbitration (or both) before they can enforce their rights in court. While mediation and arbitration have their virtues, these provisions are often designed to make it harder (and more expensive) for franchisees to pursue valid claims against their franchisor. 2. Choice of Venue. In addition, franchise agreements will usually contain provisions stating that all disputes are subject to jurisdiction and venue in the state (and sometimes the city or county) where the franchisor’s headquarters are located. This, again, makes it more difficult and expensive for the franchisee – and provides home field advantage for the franchisor. 3. Non-Competition Covenants. Non-competition covenants in franchise agreements will often prohibit franchisees from operating independently once their franchise agreement expires. While there are some legitimate […]

Read More

When you purchased your franchise, hopefully you went into it with the understanding that, at some point, your franchise rights would come to an end. If that time has come, you need to make a decision about what you are going to do next. At a high level, you have two primary options. You can either: Let your franchise agreement expire; or, Seek to renew for another franchise term. Letting Your Franchise Agreement Expire If you are ready for your franchise venture to come to an end, you may simply choose to let your franchise agreement expire. But, before you do, there are a few key provisions in most franchise agreements that you will want to keep in mind: Non-Competition. It is very possible that your franchise agreement contains a “non-competition” covenant that prevents you from competing with the franchisor and its other franchisees. What exactly it means to “compete” will depend on the specific language in your contract. But, at a minimum, you can generally expect to be prohibited from opening a similar type of business within a certain radius of your franchised outlet for at least a couple of years. Non-Solicitation. In addition to non-competition covenants, most franchise agreements also include provisions that prohibit solicitation of your franchise customers – for any business whatsoever. That customer list that you thought was yours? It actually belongs to your franchisor. Post-Termination Obligations. When your franchise expires, you will be expected to completely de-brand and stop use of any and all […]

Read More

As a franchisee (or prospective franchisee), among the many important issues you need to consider is the question of geographic protection. When you buy a franchise, you expect to benefit from the franchisor’s brand, systems and goodwill, and the last thing you want is for another franchisee – or even the franchisor – to end up using these against you. When many people hear that they have a “territory,” they assume this means that their territory is exclusive—that is, that no one else within the franchise system will be able to compete against them in their territory. Unfortunately, this isn’t always the case, and the actual territorial rights that are offered (if any) often are not clear in the franchise agreement or the Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD). Exclusive vs. Protected Territories Although they are often used interchangeably, “exclusive” and “protected” can actually have different meanings in the franchise context. If your franchise territory is truly exclusive, your business should be the only source of the franchisor’s goods or services in the territory. On the other hand, if your territory is merely protected, then your franchise agreement may authorize certain forms of competition, such as franchisor sales through alternative channels of distribution (i.e. the internet). As a third option, some franchise systems do not offer any territorial protection at all. In these systems, the franchisor is free to open competing outlets and use alternative channels wherever it pleases. While you may initially be willing to trust your franchisor not to “cannibalize” […]

Read More

When you are considering a new franchise opportunity, the franchisor will provide you with two main legal documents: a Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD) and a franchise agreement (at least initially, the franchise agreement will be included as an exhibit or attachment to the FDD). By federal regulation, the franchisor must provide you with the FDD at least 14 days before you sign the franchise agreement, and some states’ franchise laws require even earlier disclosure. Part of the reason for this is that these documents are exceedingly complex (and long), and it is critical to make sure that you have a thorough understanding of the franchise opportunity before you sign on the dotted line. The Importance of Understanding Your Franchise Agreement and FDD So, should you hire an attorney to review your franchise agreement and FDD? Absolutely. Despite the franchise relationship and disclosure laws that exist in some states, most franchise relationships are still extremely one-sided. If you are not familiar with the way FDDs and franchise agreements are written, you will almost certainly overlook important issues that could have drastic financial and legal implications over the life of your franchise. An experienced franchise lawyer will be able to assess your franchise opportunity in light of industry standards and with an eye toward ensuring that you have reasonable protections in the event that something goes wrong. Top Reasons to Hire a Franchise Agreement Lawyer Before You Sign a Franchise Agreement With these considerations in mind, here are five of the top […]

Read More

As a franchisee, it is important to have at least a basic understanding of the laws that protect you. With the recent growth of the franchise industry, more companies are turning to the franchise model for growth, and unfortunately more franchisees in new and established systems alike are finding themselves in situations where they need to take legal action to enforce their rights. States With Franchise Relationship, Registration and Disclosure Laws Currently, 21 states and the District of Columbia have franchise relationship or franchise registration and disclosure laws (or both). These laws serve different purposes, but the overarching concept is that they are designed to provide at least some measure of protection for franchisees. It is widely understood that franchisors have the upper hand in franchise agreement negotiations and in the ongoing franchise relationship, and as a result state franchise laws provide franchisees with certain rights even if those rights are not explicitly stated in the franchise agreement. Along with Washington D.C., the following states currently have franchise laws in place: Arkansas California Connecticut Delaware Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kentucky Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Nebraska New Jersey Tennessee Virginia Washington Wisconsin What if Your State Does Not Have a Franchise Law? If your state does not have a franchise law (or even if it does), there still may be other statutes or case law that protect you. For example, many states have industry-specific laws that franchisees and their franchise attorneys can use to their advantage. States also have […]

Read More

Is your franchisor your joint-employer under the labor laws? Currently pending before the US Congress is a bill that would prevent the NLRB from applying the NLRA to franchising. There is currently great uncertainty over the question of whether a franchisor can be held accountable for its franchisees’ labor and employment obligations under the NLRA. On the one hand, the NLRB is currently seeking to hold McDonald’s, as a franchisor, liable for violations of the NLRA; on the other hand, the NLRB’s Office of General Counsel has issued an Advice Memorandum in the Freshii case concluding that the fast-casual restaurant chain Freshii did not qualify as a joint employer for its franchisee’s unfair labor practices violations. Although resolution of the joint-employer dispute has the potential to impose real costs on franchising as a distribution model, it is not likely that the upshot will threaten the existence of franchising, as argued by some franchisor advocates.

Read More

https://www.asianhospitality.com/trends-n-issues/Terrorist+attacks+to+peepholes+/2530 THE DEADLY TERRORIST attack in Pakistan on the Marriott Islamabad Hotel in 2008; the filming of Erin Andrews in her hotel room through a peephole at the Nashville Marriott in 2008; the alleged contraction of Legionnaires’ Disease from the whirlpool tub and swimming pool at the Sheraton Hotel North Charleston in 2009. How are these dreadful events related? They are connected by similar lawsuits in which injured hotel guests sought, unsuccessfully, to impose damages liability on the franchisors.

Read More

RIDING THE CIRCUITS FOR HOTEL FRANCHISEE CASES: Good news and bad news for THI franchisee defaulted for failure to appear in Court: [Judge: “I will enter a default judgment. THI is awarded $327,213.03, comprising: (i) $207,414.71 in outstanding fees; (ii) liquidated damages of $76,500; (iii) $34,711.60 in interest on the LDs.” However, the Judge in his discretion denied THI’s request for $164,768.40 in trebled damages for post-termination Lanham Act violations. Travelodge Hotels v. S.S.B. Assoc. 7/27/15]; Court cuts Super 8 Franchisor slack for its failure to prosecute: [Judge: “The Court finds that reinstatement of  (Super 8’s) Complaint would result in little, if any, prejudice to the defendants. The defendants do not appear to have incurred any expense or inconvenience in defending this litigation. In any event, the delay between dismissal and the motion for reinstatement—less than 5 months—is too slight to detrimentally affect the proceedings.” Super 8 v. Kusum 7/29/15]; Appeals Court reverses trial court’s refusal to allow Red Lion Franchisee to use Washington State Franchisee Bill of Rights: [Judge: “We conclude the best interpretation of FIPA's bill of rights is the same as our interpretation of California's analogous Equipment Dealers Act. In the case now before us, the franchisor is incorporated in Washington and has its headquarters in Washington, and the franchise agreement provides for the application of Washington law. We hold that FIPA's bill of rights applies to this dispute even though the franchise is located outside Washington.” Red Lion Hotels v. MAK 2012]; Although Franchisor shows infringement […]

Read More