Franchisor 101: No Repairing Delayed Filing

Lewitt Hackman

A New Jersey federal court denied a franchisor’s motion for preliminary injunction against a franchisee due to franchisor’s 11 month delay in bringing the motion. Franchisee entered into two franchise agreements with H-1 Auto Care, to operate in Mercerville and Flemington, New Jersey. In October 2020, the franchisee told H-1 he planned to close both locations and file for bankruptcy.

The parties agreed to terminate the Mercerville franchise agreement by November 30. The termination agreement said the non-compete and non-solicitation covenants in the franchise agreement would remain effective. The franchisee told H-1 that the Flemington location would close by December 31. Although H-1 agreed to terminate the Flemington franchise in December 2020, the franchisee continued to operate in Flemington as an H-1 Auto Care location, using the same phone number as the franchised business and calling customers to the new store, in violation of the non-compete provisions of the franchise agreement.

In January 2021, H-1 discovered the franchisee formed two entities to operate competing businesses at the previously franchised locations. Eleven months later, H-1 filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction and money damages against its former franchisee for using H-1’s business resources and employees to open competing businesses in violation of the franchise agreements. H-1 sought a preliminary injunction.

The court limited its analysis to whether there was irreparable harm, which is required for a preliminary injunction. The court explained that H-1 needed to demonstrate irreparable harm by a clear showing of immediate irreparable injury and show that an injunction was the only way to protect H-1 from such harm. Because H-1 waited 11 months to seek the preliminary injunction after learning of franchisee’s competing businesses, with no effort to justify the delay, the court found the delay showed H-1’s anticipated injuries were not irreparable harm and therefore denied the motion.

Franchisors should consult counsel immediately on discovering a franchisee’s breach of any agreement to determine what action should be taken to preserve the franchisor’s rights. Unnecessary delay in bringing suit may limit a franchisor’s available remedies.

H-1 Auto CARE LLC v. Lasher, Civil Action No. 21-18110 (ZNQ) (TJB), 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192328 (D.N.J. Oct. 21, 2022)

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.

© Lewitt Hackman | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Lewitt Hackman
Contact
more
less

Lewitt Hackman on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide