Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Honesty Is Fundamentally the Best Policy
The Superior Court of Pennsylvania recently delivered good news for franchisors and their counsel, as it expressly held 'that there are circumstances where the nature of the breach permits the aggrieved party to immediately terminate the contract despite a 'cure' provision where a franchisee commits grievous acts of dishonest conduct.' In LJL Transp., Inc. v. Pilot Air Freight Corp., __ A2.d __, 2006 PA Super 176, 2006 WL 1977508 (Pa. Super, Pa. July 17, 2006) (No. 2068 EDA 2005), Judge Richard B. Klein, with Judge Maureen Lally-Green concurring, authored the opinion affirming a Northampton County trial court's order denying the franchisee's motion for summary judgment and granting the franchisor's cross-motion for summary judgment.
As recognized by the trial court, the case was one of first impression in Pennsylvania. At issue was an examination of the propriety of a franchise termination arising out of a franchisee's demonstrated and admitted lack of honesty. The facts are simple. Franchisor, Pilot Air Freight Corporation ('Pilot'), terminated its Lehigh Valley and Harrisburg, PA, franchisee's franchise agreement without affording the franchisee an opportunity to cure pursuant to the agreement's 90-day cure provision. Pilot stated that its reasons for terminating the franchise were that the franchisee: 1) improperly shipped products through third-party affiliated entities of the franchisee, ie, other than Pilot, and 2) failed to disclose those shipments and payments to Pilot.
The franchisee countered that the termination was improper because it was deprived of an absolute right: the opportunity to cure pursuant to the franchise agreement's 90-day cure provision. Additionally, the franchisee argued that the absolute right to cure ' irrespective of the type of breach at issue ' meant that, under the circumstances of the case, the franchisee should have been given the opportunity to make payment of royalties on the shipments that were improperly diverted.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.