News & Analysis as of

Class Action No-Poaching Franchises

A class action is a type of legal action where a representative individual or group of individuals can bring a claim on behalf of a larger group or class who share a common legal interest.
Bilzin Sumberg

District Court Denies Burger King’s Motion to Dismiss Putative Class Action Related to No-Poaching Provisions in Franchise...

Bilzin Sumberg on

Arrington v. Burger King Worldwide, Inc., No. 1:18-cv-24128 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 5, 2018) – In October 2018, Jarvis Arrington, a former employee at a Burger King franchisee in Illinois, filed a class action complaint against...more

Lathrop GPM

Kentucky Federal Court Questions Proposed $5 Million Settlement in Anti-poaching Class Action

Lathrop GPM on

Refusing to rubber-stamp a proposed $5 million anti-poaching class action settlement, a federal court in Kentucky has directed the plaintiff to provide additional information to allow proper consideration of the factors...more

Lathrop GPM

Seventh Circuit Reverses Dismissal of Anti-Poaching Class Action Against McDonald’s

Lathrop GPM on

In an important case of first impression that drew amicus participation from the Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission, and the International Franchise Association, the Seventh Circuit reversed a judgment in...more

Bilzin Sumberg

Eleventh Circuit Revives Putative Class Action Against Burger King for Violation of Federal Antitrust Laws Based on No-Poaching...

Bilzin Sumberg on

Arrington v. Burger King Worldwide, Inc., No. 20-13561 (11th Cir. Aug. 31, 2022) – In October 2018, a former line cook of a Burger King franchise restaurant in Illinois, filed a class action complaint in the District Court...more

BakerHostetler

Decision Benefits Franchise Businesses and Finds Alston Bars Challenge to No-Poach Agreements

BakerHostetler on

In June 2021, the Supreme Court reaffirmed in NCAA v. Alston that antitrust claims under Section 1 of the Sherman Act “presumptively” call for rule-of-reason analysis and that only the rare case merits “quick look” or per se...more

Lathrop GPM

The Franchise Memorandum - Issue #269

Lathrop GPM on

Two Illinois Federal Courts Deny Class Certification in Anti-Poaching Class Actions Against Franchisors - Two federal courts in Illinois have rejected motions to certify classes of employees who worked in franchised...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Legal Challenges to No-Poach Provisions in Franchise Agreements

Troutman Pepper Locke on

Over the last 18 months, no-poach provisions in franchise agreements have drawn considerable attention from academics, state attorneys general, politicians, and the class action plaintiffs’ bar. Originally published in...more

Lewitt Hackman

FRANCHISOR 101: Thrust Into Antitrust

Lewitt Hackman on

Jimmy John’s will face antitrust claims, after an Illinois federal judge declined to dismiss allegations in a class action. Plaintiffs claim the chain’s franchise agreement harmed competition by preventing franchisee...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Antitrust Scrutiny of No-Poaching Agreements Continues to Pick Up Steam

Foley & Lardner LLP on

To most people, “poaching” is a bad thing, connoting a mix of elephant hunting and mediocre eggs. But in labor and employment—where “poaching” means recruiting away another employer’s talent—antitrust regulators, legislators,...more

Polsinelli

Anti-Poaching Provisions in Franchise Agreements Are Drawing Increased Scrutiny

Polsinelli on

Franchise agreements often contain provisions prohibiting the franchisee from soliciting or hiring workers employed by the franchisor or other franchisees. Such “anti-poaching” agreements have recently come under increased...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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.
- hide
- hide