Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 817.416
CopyCited 256 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 38 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 576, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 26626
...After some discussions between the parties, Griffin filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida on May 2, 1980, alleging common law fraud and violations of Florida’s Franchises and Distributorships Act, Fla.Stat. § 817.416 (1979) and Florida’s Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Fla....
CopyCited 68 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14908, 1996 WL 272350
...Therefore, the Magistrate Judge's October 13 Report and Recommendation is AFFIRMED as to Count *1431 I of the Complaint, and Burger King's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED as to Count I. B. Count II: Violation of the Florida Franchise Act In Count II of the Complaint, Barnes alleges Burger King violated Fla.Stat. § 817.416(2)(a) "by purposefully misrepresenting material facts with the intent to induce BARNES to enter into a Franchise Agreement with BKC." Complaint at ¶ 48. § 817.416(2)(a)(3) provides: (a) It is unlawful, when selling or establishing a franchise or distributorship, for any person: 3....
...Barnes further alleges that Burger King reinforced its misrepresentations by sending the July 21 letter discussed above to Barnes and by causing the October 7 "clarifying" letter not to be sent to Barnes. Complaint ¶¶ 49-50. In its Motion for Summary Judgment, Burger King argues that Barnes' claims under § 817.416 must fail because, to recover under the Act, "a franchisee must demonstrate `proof of intentional words or conduct by the franchisor ......
...Barnes responds that there are material issues of fact regarding the application of the Act and the Shin negotiations. This Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that there are genuine issues of material fact which preclude judgment as a matter of law for the following reasons. *1432 1. Burger King's Duty to Disclose Under § 817.416(2)(a)3....
...n law. The Florida Act imposes a duty on the franchisor to disclose "efforts to sell or establish more franchises or distributorships than is reasonable to expect the market or market area for the particular franchise or distributorship to sustain." § 817.416(2)(a)3....
CopyCited 38 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16273, 1992 WL 309059
...n a prospective franchisee that the parties are operating at arms-length. Accordingly, Count XIV is hereby DISMISSED. 7. Count XV: Breach of Florida Franchise Act In Count XV, Plaintiffs allege that BKC breached the Florida Franchise Act (Fla. Stat. § 817.416) by intentionally misrepresenting *1022 material facts regarding Franchise # 6470 that were intended to induce Austins to enter into Franchise Agreement # 6470, and which Austins relied on in entering into such Agreements. BKC counters that Austins do not have standing under the Florida Franchise Act (§ 817.416(1)(a)) because it applies only to "persons" that are "doing business in Florida." Austins counter that the choice of law provision in the Franchise Offering Memorandum and Franchise Agreement explicitly states that Florida law will govern the parties' relationship....
...[23] The Florida Franchise Act does not reveal a similar, clear intention by the Florida legislature to limit its application to Florida residents or domiciliaries. The Act defines "person" as "an individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other entity doing business in Florida." Fla.Stat. § 817.416(1)(a). It then defines "franchise or distributorship" as "a contract or agreement ... between two or more persons." Id. at § 817.416(1)(b) (emphasis added). The Act goes on to declare it "unlawful, when selling or establishing a franchise or distributorship, for any person " to make certain intentional misrepresentations, id. at § 817.416(2) (emphasis added), and provides that "[a]ny person, who shows in a civil court of law a violation of this section may receive a judgment for all moneys invested in such franchise or distributorship." Id. at § 817.416(3) (emphasis added)....
...stage of this litigation. [31] Accordingly, we do not strike Austins' claim for punitive damages for negligent misrepresentation at this time. The Court agrees with BKC that punitive damages are unavailable under the Florida Franchise Act. Fla.Stat. § 817.416(3) *1026 explicitly permits one who demonstrates a violation under the Act to recover "all moneys invested in such franchise or distributorship" plus "reasonable attorney's fees." B....
...auses for public policy reasons. See, e.g., Winer Motors, Inc. v. Jaguar Rover Triumph, Inc., 208 N.J.Super. 666, 506 A.2d 817 (1986). [26] BKC also claims that defendants "have failed to allege the requisite elements of a cause of action under [§] 817.416." The Court disagrees....
CopyCited 37 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20589, 1995 WL 762146
...§§ 1981 and 1982; Count III seeks relief on a state law theory of fraud; Count IV seeks relief for BKC's alleged intentional interference with contractual relations; Count V seeks relief for breach of contract; Count VII seeks relief under the Florida Franchise Act, Fla. Stat. § 817.416; Count VIII seeks rescission of their Franchise and Lease Agreements with BKC for Burger King® Restaurant No....
...ther the source of the business opportunity [it] allegedly interfered with. Consequently, no claim for tortious interference exists against BKC."). 58. Nor have Agad and Balagamwala stated a cause of action under the Florida Franchise Act, Fla.Stat. § 817.416....
...[44] Further, Agad and Balagamwala acquired Restaurant No. 2034 directly from Joe Profit, another BKC franchisee. Since BKC did not sell the restaurant to plaintiffs, the Act is inapplicable. See Schubot v. McDonalds Corp., supra,
757 F.Supp. at 1358 (section
817.416 did not apply because plaintiff purchased restaurant from another franchisee and not from franchisor)....
...With respect to plaintiffs' claim that BKC misrepresented the appropriate size and profitability of Restaurant No. 5018 (Cplt. ¶ 125), the former allegation does not fall within the scope of representations prohibited under the Florida Franchise Act and the latter states no cause of action. In order to recover under section 817.416, a franchisee must demonstrate "proof of intentional words or conduct by the franchisor, concerning the prospects or chances of success of the enterprise, which were relied upon by the franchisee to his detriment, and which are not in accordance with the facts." Travelodge Int'l, Inc....
CopyCited 36 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2006 WL 708431
...the dismissal with prejudice on the cross-appeal. Plaintiff owns a personnel recruitment franchise, which she purchased from franchisor AREI. On April 23, 2002, plaintiff sued AREI for breach of contract, rescission, and statutory restitution under section 817.416(3), Florida Statutes....
CopyCited 27 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13921, 2000 WL 1629442
...an advantageous business relationship (Count IV), a federal Sherman Antitrust violation (Count V), a federal Clayton Act and Robinson-Patman Act Antitrust violation (Count VI), a violation of Florida Restraint of Trade laws (Count VII), violation of section 817.416, Florida Statutes (1993), criminalizing fraudulent business practices and providing civil remedies (Count VIII) and civil conspiracy and damages therefrom (Count IX)....
CopyCited 22 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 776, 2008 WL 195107
...We begin by observing that when presented with a motion to dismiss, a trial court is required to "treat the factual allegations of the complaint as true and to consider those allegations in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs." Id. at 734-35 (citations omitted). Section 817.416(2), Florida Statutes (2005), reads in pertinent part as follows: (a) It is unlawful, when selling or establishing a franchise ....
...Haber, misrepresented the known total investment for the franchise, all of which misled the appellant into handing over the $50,000 fee and investing money in the franchise operation. It appears to us that KC Leisure has sufficiently pled the requirements of section 817.416 to state a cause of action....
...ourt for further proceedings. REVERSED and REMANDED. PLEUS and EVANDER, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] We also considered other issues in this controversy in Thorpe v. Gelbwaks,
953 So.2d 606 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). [2] §§
501.201-213, Fla. Stat. (2005). [3] §
817.416, Fla....
CopyCited 21 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19838, 1993 WL 597404
...Because Holder has not alleged a breach of the contract's express terms this count cannot stand. Accordingly, Count III of Holder's Amended Counterclaim is DISMISSED. C. Burger King's Application to Dismiss Count IV. Burger King asserts that Holder's claim based on the Florida Franchise Act ("FFA"), Fla.Stat. § 817.416, must be dismissed because all of Holder's franchises are located in Kansas....
...The FFA makes it illegal for any "person" to knowingly misrepresent information concerning the sale or establishing of a franchise, and provides a civil cause of action to recover moneys invested in such a franchise as well as attorney's fees. The parties agree that there are no cases which address whether § 817.416 applies to the sale of franchises located in other jurisdictions. Section 817.416(1)(a), however, defines person as an "individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other entity doing business in Florida" and prohibits that "person" from misrepresenting information relating to a franchise sale....
...NOTES [1] Gappa and Rackstraw have also adopted Burger King's Motion to Dismiss. [2] Burger King Memorandum of Law at 1 (emphasis added). [3] See Burger King Memorandum at 3 n. 3. [4] The Court also rejects Burger King's argument that Holder has failed to allege the requisite elements of a § 817.416 action....
CopyCited 21 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2005 WL 2016838
...e public because to do so would be contrary to public policy. See Holt v. O'Brien Imports of Fort Myers, Inc.,
862 So.2d 87, 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Appellees' complaint against VoiceStream includes a claim for violation of the Florida Franchise Act, section
817.416, Florida Statutes (2000), which provides that a party who shows a violation of the Act may recover "all moneys invested in such franchise or distribution" and the court may award such person reasonable attorney's fees and costs. §
817.416(3), Fla....
...However, to the extent that the limitation does defeat the purpose of a remedial statute, the limitation may be found void as a matter of law. See Fonte v. AT & T Wireless Servs., Inc.,
903 So.2d 1019, 1024 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). Therefore, on remand, should the Dealers prove their entitlement to money damages provided for in section
817.416 at arbitration, the limitation of liability clause may not be a basis upon which to deprive the Dealers of their statutory remedy....
CopyCited 19 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1162, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2716, 1989 WL 49624
...o market their vehicles in Revels' territory. Consequential damages were alleged and sought in the form of lost profits and sales, floor plan and financing costs, and funds invested into the dealership. Count II of the complaint alleged violation of Section 817.416, Florida Statutes (the Florida Franchise Fraud Act), in that Beaver knowingly misrepresented that the contractually designated territory would be exclusive to Revels in order to induce Revels' execution of the contract, and further fa...
...rd a remedy which was excluded by the contract, citing Alco Standard Corp. v. Benelal,
345 F. Supp. 14 (E.D.Pa. 1972). With regard to Count II of the complaint, Revels further argued that, because it alleged violation of a statutory duty, imposed by Section
817.416, not to fradulently induce franchise contracts, the acts complained of did not "arise from or relate to" the Agreement so as to place the allegations within the Agreement's arbitration clause....
...do not pertain to the arbitration clause itself, should be resolved in arbitration. Benoay v. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc.,
805 F.2d 1437, 1441 (11th Cir.1986) (emphasis supplied). As noted above, Count II of the complaint alleged violations of Section
817.416, Florida Statutes, in that 1) Beaver knowingly misrepresented that the contractually designated territory would be exclusive to Revels in order to induce Revels' execution of the contract, and 2) failed to disclose its intention to es...
...Based on the damages claim, the court denied arbitrability as to Count II in reliance on Alco and, as explicated above, denial on that ground was erroneous. However, arbitrability was also denied as to this count on the ground that the violations alleged therein were based on Section 817.416, Florida Statutes, independently of the contract herein, and hence such allegations did not "arise from or relate to" the contract so as to fall within the provisions of the arbitration clause. We note first of all that fraudulent inducement to enter into a franchise agreement by misrepresentations regarding exclusivity of sales territory is not proscribed by Section 817.416, and hence is not subject to the trial court's specific objection as to this count of the complaint....
...ention herein that the arbitration clause itself was fraudulently induced, Revels' contention that Beaver fraudulently induced the contract by misrepresentations of territory exclusivity is clearly arbitrable. We make the same finding with regard to Section 817.416(2)(a)3, Florida Statutes, governing Revels' allegation that Beaver intentionally misrepresented its intentions to sell more franchises than was reasonable to expect the market area for the particular area to sustain....
...are outside the limitations clause. This rationale, as has been shown, is without merit. Further, at least one other Florida court, when faced with the refusal of a trial court to compel arbitration with regard to a misrepresentation in violation of Section 817.416, Florida Statutes, has reversed and remanded with directions to compel arbitration on that issue....
CopyCited 17 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18129, 1990 WL 264487
...cess of the Plaintiff's McDonalds restaurants...." The plaintiffs, therefore allege violations of Florida Statute Chapter 817, The Florida Franchise Disclosure Act. Complaint, ¶ 68(b). In this instance, the Court is directed towards Florida Statute § 817.416, a criminal statute, which prohibits fraudulent acts in the sale or establishment of business opportunities. Specifically, § 817.416(2)(a) states that: *1358 It is unlawful, when selling or establishing a franchise or distributorship, for any person: 1....
...or 3. Intentionally to misrepresent or fail to disclose efforts to sell or establish more franchises or distributorships than is reasonable to expect the market or market area for the particular franchise or distributorship to sustain. Fla.Stat.Ann. § 817.416(2)(a) (West 1988)....
CopyCited 15 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 2013 WL 5005730, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130538
...came and remained Xan-boo dealers. Id. ¶¶ 149-155. The next three counts in Plaintiffs’ Complaint set forth statutory causes of action under Florida law. More specifically, Count VI asserts that all Defendants violated Florida’s Franchise Act, Section 817.416, Fla....
...Plaintiffs’ Statutory Claims Against the Diamond Defendants Are Dismissed 1. Florida Franchise Act Claims Count VI of Plaintiffs’ Complaint asserts a claim against all Defendants for violation of the Florida Franchise Act (“FFA”), Fla. Stat. § 817.416 ....
...D.E. 1, ¶¶ 156-163. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges, generally, that “Defendants misrepresented to Plaintiffs, among other things, ‘the prospects or chances of success of a proposed or existing franchise or distributorship’ ” in violation of Section 817.416(2)(a)(l)....
CopyCited 15 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 23897
...Plaintiff appealed the adverse judgment and this court affirmed in an unpublished opinion. Interstate Pipe Maintenance, Inc. v. FMC Corp.,
749 F.2d 732 (11th Cir.1984). While the appeal in the prior case was pending plaintiff filed the present case in state court seeking relief under Florida Statute section
817.416....
CopyCited 15 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 11142, 2003 WL 21713707
...ct to the control of the employer as to the means to be used, then he is not an independent contractor). Applying the "control" test to a franchise is not an easy task. On the one hand, a franchise clearly has an independent aspect to it. See, e.g., § 817.416(1)(b), Fla....
CopyCited 14 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2001 WL 1409448
...We reverse the judgments entered against Herbert Brown because there was no competent, substantial evidence that he personally participated in any wrongful conduct. We also reverse the judgment entered in favor of Robert Gagne on his claim for violation of the Florida Franchise Act. § 817.416, Fla....
...both Tampa Checkmate and Mr. Gagne to pursue claims against Checkers and its officers based upon the Florida Franchise Act. Mr. Gagne argues that he is a "person" who "invested" in a franchise and thus he may recover individually under the Act. See § 817.416(3). We disagree. In this case, the "person who invested" in the Checkers franchise is Tampa Checkmate, see § 817.416(1)(a), not Mr....
CopyCited 11 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...Bockover answered and filed a counterclaim for damages alleging that Chicken Unlimited had been guilty of (1) unfair and deceptive trade practices as prohibited by Section
501.204, Florida Statutes (1977), [1] (2) intentional misrepresentations in the sale of a franchise as prohibited by Section
817.416, Florida Statutes (1977), and (3) common law fraud....
CopyCited 11 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...Travelodge International, Inc., appeals from a final judgment entered after a jury trial in which the jury awarded damages of $25,575.00 to appellees, Eastern Inns, Inc., and the individual defendants, on their counterclaim. Travelodge relies for reversal primarily upon its contentions (1) that Section 817.416(2)(a)(1), Florida Statutes, providing for recovery of damages against a franchisor for intentionally misrepresenting the prospects or chances for success of a franchise, must be construed as requiring the same proof as is required for...
...se of the franchise. The trial judge directed a verdict on appellees' counterclaim so far as it sought recovery under the theory of common law fraud, but granted appellees' motion to amend their counterclaim by specifically referring to the statute, Section 817.416, Florida Statutes, as a basis for the cause of action....
...Rule 1.190, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. The jury returned a verdict denying appellant-Travelodge any recovery on its claims for breach of contract, and awarded damages as indicated above on appellees' counterclaim for intentional misrepresentation under the statute. The statute, Section 817.416(2)(a)(1), provides in part: (a) It is unlawful, when selling or establishing a franchise or distributorship, for any person: 1....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 356, 2012 WL 104464
...between Beaver and [Revels] arising out of or relating to this agreement, shall be decided by arbitration ...” was broad in scope and required the arbitration of claims for fraud in the inducement and violation of the Florida Franchise Fraud Act, section 817.416(2)(a)3, Florida Statutes....
CopyCited 7 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1993 WL 140097
...donment of any reliance on Arizona arbitration law or as an acknowledgment of conflict. In either case, USAA would supply the rule of decision. [10] See §
501.201 et seq., Fla. Stat. (1991). [11] See §§
559.80-559.815, Fla. Stat. (1991). [12] See §
817.416, Fla....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2638, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16279
...ions to her regarding the degree and likelihood of acquiring a profitable business. Count two alleged that the fraudulent acts complained of in count one constituted a violation of §
501.204, Florida Statutes. Count three sought damages pursuant to §
817.416(3), and count four sought rescission of the franchise agreement because of the alleged fraud....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 19871
...against fraudulent commercial practices than already existing legal remedies. [2] There are sixty-five sections under Chapter 817 identifying and prohibiting certain frauds. Nearly all of the frauds are made criminal acts and are punishable as such. Section 817.416, supra, prohibits misrepresentations in the sale of franchises and distributorships. A violation of the section is a crime. § 817.416(2)(b)....
...Activities in violation of the section may be enjoined by the Department of Legal Affairs or the Department of Agriculture and Consumers Services in behalf of the people of the state. Most persuasive to an interpretation of the provision in question is the language found in subsection (3) of Section 817.416 which provides for a civil remedy in addition to criminal penalties and injunctive relief: Any person, who shows in a civil court of law a violation of this section may receive a judgment for all moneys invested in such a franchise or distributorship....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2007 WL 776611
...NOTES [1] Fla. R.App. P. 9.130(a)(3)(C)(i) ("Appeals to the district courts of appeal of non-final orders are limited to those that . . . determine . . . the jurisdiction of the person."). [2] §§
559.80-.815, Fla. Stat. [3] §§
501.201-.213, Fla. Stat. [4] §
817.416, Fla....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | District Court, N.D. Florida | 39 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 985, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22313, 1998 WL 1034912
...23), filed on January 7, 1997, contains the following eight counts: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (3) common law fraud and misrepresentation; (4) negligent misrepresentation; (5) violation of the Florida Franchise Act, § 817.416(2)(a), Florida Statutes; (6) promissory estoppel; (7) equitable estoppel; and (8) recission....
....... 3. Intentionally to misrepresent or fail to disclose efforts to sell or establish more franchises or distributorships than is reasonable to expect the market or market area for the particular franchise or distributorship to sustain. Fla. Stat. § 817.416(2)(a)....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 410, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 433, 1988 WL 8109
...Jerry and Cory Day appeal from a judgment pursuant to a directed verdict entered against them on three out of four counts in the Days' counterclaim against Le-Jo Enterprises, and the trial court's denial of their motion to amend their counterclaim pursuant to section 817.416, Florida Statutes (1981)....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14309, 1996 WL 403272
...Defendant has filed a Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiff's remaining claim under the Florida Franchise Act for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on the grounds that Plaintiff, an out of state franchisee, lacks standing to sue under the Act. The civil enforcement provision of the Florida Franchise Act, Fla. Stat. § 817.416(3), provides, in pertinent part: "Any person, who shows in a civil court of law a violation of this section may receive a judgment for all moneys invested in such franchise or distributorship ..." A "person" is defined under the Act as "an individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other entity doing business in Florida." § 817.416(1)(a) (emphasis added)....
...858 (1933); State ex rel Ellis v. Tampa Waterworks Co.,
56 Fla. 858,
47 So. 358 (1908). Therefore, the parties' Agreement is subject to the Florida Franchise Act. The plain language of the Act indicates that the Act only applies to "persons" that are "doing business in Florida." §
817.416(1)(a)....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | District Court, M.D. Florida
...The Causes of Action This case, which is the product of two separate causes of actions in two districts, is more complicated than it should be. Plaintiffs assert seven causes of action against each Defendant (doc. 1): fraudulent inducement (count one); violation of the Florida Franchise Act, Fla. Stat. § 817.416 (count two); violation of the Florida Sale of Business Opportunities Act, Fla....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 22114
...ear. Livingston accepted the keys from the O'Maras and then changed the locks on the store. Florida Franchise Act 4 Dairy Queen presents four reasons why plaintiffs should not be allowed to recover under the Florida Franchise Act, Fla.Stat.Ann. Sec. 817.416: first, plaintiffs' store was not a "franchise" as defined by the Act; second, the Act only prohibits misrepresentations by the seller of the franchise and Noble was the seller, not Dairy Queen; third, the trial court misinstructed the jury o...
...5 Is a Dairy Queen Store a Franchise? The Florida Franchise Act defines the term "franchise" as a contract "[w]herein the operation of the franchisee's business franchise is substantially reliant on franchisers for the basic supply of goods." Fla.Stat.Ann. Sec. 817.416(1)(b)(4)....
...The district court correctly held the business was a franchise under the Florida Franchise Act. 8 Persons Prohibited From Making Misrepresentations. Dairy Queen argues the Franchise Act prohibits misrepresentation by sellers, and that it did not sell the business to plaintiffs. Section 817.416(2)(a) of the Act provides: 9 (a) It is unlawful, when selling or establishing a franchise or distributorship, for any person: 10 1....
...ations. Dairy Queen granted a license to Noble to establish a Dairy Queen store. A Dairy Queen licensee can only assign the franchise with Dairy Queen's approval. Dairy Queen approved Noble's sale and assignment to plaintiffs. A construction of Sec. 817.416(2)(a)(1) which would exclude a franchiser on these facts would not be in accord with the Florida statute's purpose of curbing overreaching by franchisers....
...No evidence was presented that Dairy Queen took possession of the Delray Beach store for its own use. Attorney's Fees 17 Dairy Queen contends that the district court's award of $25,000 attorney's fees to plaintiffs was excessive. The attorney's fees were awarded pursuant to the Florida Franchise Act. Fla.Stat.Ann. Sec. 817.416(3)....
...The attorneys are directed to settle the amount between themselves. In the absence of an agreement, appropriate affidavits may be submitted for decision by this Court as to the amount of attorney's fees to be awarded to plaintiffs. 21 AFFIRMED. 1 Sec. 817.416(1)(b) & (c) provide: (b) The term "franchise or distributorship" means a contract or agreement, either expressed or implied, whether oral or written, between two or more persons: 1 Wherein a commercial relationship of definite duration or con...
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 321
...Appellees' complaint alleged five causes of action. Count I alleged that appellant had violated Florida securities law under chapter 517, Florida Statutes. Count II concerned purported misrepresentations regarding the prospects for success of a franchise, in violation of section 817.416, Florida Statutes (1983)....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...Seacrest of Peterson, Carr, Harris & Seacrest, Lakeland, for appellant. Lex M. Taylor Jr., of Oxford, Oxford and Taylor, Lakeland, for appellees. McNULTY, Chief Judge. We affirm the judgment appealed from herein in all respects but we touch briefly on the one point meriting discussion. Section 817.416, F.S....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | District Court, M.D. Florida | 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135065, 2010 WL 5317363
...deal Image, a Florida Corporation, on April 26, 2007, in the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County, Florida. (Doc. ## 1, 2). The Hetricks' State Court Complaint sought damages pursuant to Florida's Franchise Act, Florida Statute Section 817.416....
CopyPublished | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
...ne year. Livingston accepted the keys from the O’Maras and then changed the locks on the store. Florida Franchise Act Dairy Queen presents four reasons why plaintiffs should not be allowed to recover under the Florida Franchise Act, Fla.Stat. Ann. § 817.416: first, plaintiffs’ store was not a “franchise” as defined by the Act; second, the Act only prohibits misrepresentations by the seller of the franchise and Noble was the seller, not Dairy Queen; third, the trial court misinstructed t...
...Is a Dairy Queen Store a Franchise? The Florida Franchise Act defines the term “franchise” as a contract “[wjherein the operation of the franchisee’s business franchise is substantially reliant on franchisers for the basic supply of goods.” Fla.Stat.Ann. § 817.416(l)(b)(4)....
...The district court correctly held the business was a franchise under the Florida Franchise Act. Persons Prohibited, From Making Misrepresentations. Dairy Queen argues the Franchise Act prohibits misrepresentation by sellers, and that it did not sell the business to plaintiffs. Section 817.416(2)(a) of the Act provides: (a) It is unlawful, when selling or establishing a franchise or distributorship, for any person: 1....
...s. Dairy Queen granted a license to Noble to establish a Dairy Queen store. A Dairy Queen licensee can only assign the franchise with Dairy Queen’s approval. Dairy Queen approved Noble’s sale and assignment to plaintiffs. A construction of *1553 § 817.416(2)(a)(l) which would exclude a franchiser on these facts would not be in accord with the Florida statute’s purpose of curbing overreaching by franchisers....
...No evidence was presented that Dairy Queen took possession of the Delray Beach store for its own use. Attorney’s Fees Dairy Queen contends that the district court’s award of $25,000 attorney’s fees to plaintiffs was excessive. The attorney’s fees were awarded pursuant to the Florida Franchise Act. Fla.Stat.Ann. § 817.416(3)....
...The motion is GRANTED. The attorneys are directed to settle the amount between themselves. In the absence of an agreement, appropriate affidavits may be submitted for decision by this Court as to the amount of attorney’s fees to be awarded to plaintiffs. AFFIRMED. . § 817.416(l)(b) & (c) provide: (b) The term "franchise or distributorship" means a contract or agreement, either expressed or implied, whether oral or written, between two or more persons: 1....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 6172, 2003 WL 1969223
...The failure of the plan to reach its goal resulted in the plaintiff filing a complaint against TGIF. The first complaint alleged claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, a violation of section 817.416(2)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1996), and fraud....
