Boldy v. McConnell's Fine Ice Creams, No. 89-55424 (1990)

Boldy v. McConnell's Fine Ice Creams


Boldy and others were franchisees of McConnell’s who sued the company claiming that the franchise agreement constituted an unregistered security under federal securities laws. Although franchise agreements have not normally fallen under federal securities laws, Boldy claimed that the co-mingling of funds before start-up, and the application of the risk capital test brought this particular agreement under federal securities laws.

Full case also available here:

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Published In: MLM / Direct Sales Updates, MLM Consulting / Network Marketing Updates

Reference Info:Federal, 9th Circuit, California | United States

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Babener & Associates | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »


Welcome to MLM Legal - a valuable resource to the Multi-Level Marketing and Direct Sales Industry. ... View Profile »

Follow Babener & Associates:

Reporters on Deadline