How 7-Eleven Developed a New System-Wide Franchise Agreement
June 27, 2005
In 2004, 7-Eleven, Inc. offered its entire U.S. franchise network a new franchise agreement. More than 96% of the franchisees representing its 3400 franchised stores signed the new agreement. The plans, process, and activities that were a part of this endeavor and the experiences developing and implementing this new agreement offer insight to both franchisors and franchisees when planning system-wide changes and/or new franchise agreements.
Eureka v. Wentworth: Further Erosion of the 'Hell or High Water' Principle
May 26, 2005
A fundamental tenet of equipment leasing has been the concept of "hell or high water" rental payments. Once the lease is signed and the lessee accepts the goods, then the lessee's promises under the lease become irrevocable, especially the promise to pay rent. The draftsmen of UCC Article 2A recognized this critical element and codified it with respect to a finance lease in UCC §2A-407(1)-(2) (all citations herein refer to Uniform Commercial Code Article 2A pre-2003 revisions). A finance lease is a particular type of "true" equipment lease in which the lessee itself selects the item of equipment it wants and instructs the lessor to acquire it for lease to the lessee. UCC §2A-103(g). A finance lessor is neither the manufacturer nor supplier of the item of equipment; it is merely providing the money. Article 2A of the Uniform Commercial Code (the "Code" or the "UCC") extends certain benefits to finance lessors, one of the most important of which is that the lessee's promises are not subject to termination, modification or repudiation; in other words, the lessee must comply with them come "hell or high water." UCC §2A-407(2)(b).
In The Marketplace
May 26, 2005
Highlights of the latest equipment leasing news from around the country.
Substance over Form in the Bankruptcy Courts
May 26, 2005
The old saw is that if it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck, it must be a duck. Although bankruptcy is sometimes viewed by its detractors as defiant of common sense, the common sense duck adage is alive and well in bankruptcy courts. No matter what the parties or their lawyers may call an agreement or transaction, the courts are inclined to change the label and treatment to match what they see as the parties' true intention, risk retention, or economic reality. In bankruptcy parlance, the duck rule is called "recharacterization" and it is most commonly seen when courts are asked to consider shareholder loans, personal property leases, factoring arrangements, and asset backed securitizations. Through recharacterization, loans become capital contributions, leases become security agreements, and claimed true sales (the linchpin of factoring and securitizations) become loans. The impact of relabeling an agreement or transaction is significant. What was intended to be "bankruptcy remote" may find itself at bankruptcy central. The purpose of this article is to canvass just those situations where a lender, lessor and buyer could be very surprised, and how the recharacterization can affect the parties' expectations.
Application of a Universal Law in Multidistrict Litigation
May 26, 2005
When product liability cases are consolidated through Multidistrict Litigation ("MDL") proceedings, the proceedings are rife with complexities, and the obvious temptation for an MDL judge is to streamline and simplify these proceedings as much as possible. MDL judges have many appropriate tools at their disposal, such as case management orders and adoption of uniform discovery requests, to facilitate the proceedings. While certain techniques used to simplify and consolidate are appropriate, application of a "universal law" — in which one substantive law is applied to cases from various jurisdictions — is not. Application of a universal law violates due process and places consolidation and expediency above the interests of justice. Such a dangerous proposition was briefly suggested during the Ephedra MDL proceedings, involving hundreds of cases consolidated for pretrial purposes in the Southern District of New York.
The Leasing Hotline
May 26, 2005
Highlights of the latest commercial leasing cases from around the country.
What's in a Vanilla Box?
May 26, 2005
When negotiating a long-term lease, the landlord and the tenant should specifically agree upon the condition that the premises will be in at the time of delivery by the landlord to the tenant. Too often phrases such as "vanilla box," "warm vanilla box" and "as-is condition" are utilized by leasing representatives to describe generically the condition that the premises will be in at the time of delivery. However, the differences between what each party means by those terms can be dramatic. By specifically addressing the condition of the premises, landlords and tenants may avoid costly disputes once the lease has been executed and the landlord delivers the premises. This article addresses the terminology and the common pitfalls associated with the terms "vanilla box," "warm vanilla box" and "as-is condition."
