949.252.9377
4 Park Plaza, Suite 1230
Irvine, California 92614
In Closet Tailors, LLC v. Gary Neil Poisson (JAMS, Orange County, January 2010), a former multi-unit licensee was in violation of his license agreements for: (1) failing to pay monies due to the licensor; (2) violating the noncompetition provision of the license agreements; and (3) failing to comply with the post termination provisions of the license agreements. The licensor retained Mulcahy LLP who filed a demand for arbitration asserting claims for: breach of the license agreement, and injunctive relief. Mulcahy LLP ultimately procured a monetary award and permanent injunction, in addition to attorneys’ fees and costs, in favor of the licensor.
In IAG Coffee Franchise LLC v. Sanders (AAA, Orange County, September 2008), It’s A Grind (“IAG”) coffeehouse franchisor terminated a franchisee’s franchise agreement for breaching the agreement. In response, the franchisee filed a lawsuit in Placer County Superior Court alleging fraud, violations of the California Franchise Investment Law, and price fixing in violation of the Cartwright Act. The franchisee claimed damages in excess of $700,000 and attorneys fees. IAG retained Mulcahy LLP, who immediately initiated a binding arbitration with AAA seeking declaratory relief that the termination was valid, in addition to damages and attorneys’ fees. Mulcahy LLP then filed a motion to compel arbitration with the Court requesting that the case be arbitrated in compliance with the parties’ franchise agreement. The motion was granted and the franchisee asserted its court claims as counterclaims in the arbitration action. On September 19, 2008, following a nine-day trial, the arbitrator found in IAG’s favor, denying all counterclaims asserted by the franchisee and granting IAG’s request for damages and attorneys’ fees, totaling in excess of $390,000.
In Mustard Franchise Corporation v. YEK, Inc. (AAA, Orange County, March 2008), Mustard Franchise Corporation retained Mulcahy LLP for assistance in terminating a franchisee’s agreement for its violation of the terms of its franchise agreement. Mulcahy LLP filed a demand for arbitration before the AAA seeking a declaration from the arbitrator that the franchisee violated its agreement with Mustard and that the subsequent termination was valid. In response, the franchisee filed counterclaims alleging fraud and violations of the franchise agreement by Mustard. Following a nine-day trial, the arbitrator ruled: (1) that Mustard was entitled to terminate the franchise agreement; and, (2) that the franchisee’s claims were without merit. In accordance with the post-termination obligations of the parties, Mustard was entitled to purchase the franchisee’s business and take immediate possession of the restaurant pending finalization of the purchase. The franchisee refused to comply either with its post-termination obligations or the arbitrator’s award. Mulcahy LLP thereafter filed an action in the Orange County Superior Court seeking confirmation of the arbitrator’s award and a TRO and preliminary injunction. The Court granted Mustard’s requests, entered injunctions against the franchisee, and ordered the franchisee to turn over possession of the restaurant. When the franchisor still refused to turn over possession, Mulcahy LLP obtained a writ of execution, and secured Mustard’s possession of the restaurant.
In Hartmann-Lausanne, Inc. v. Hemocue (Orange County Superior Court; JAMS Orange County) the firm tried the claims of a Texas distributor of medical products for unpaid post-termination commissions against the U.S. subsidiary of the Swedish manufacturer of the products. A three-judge arbitration panel awarded the firm’s client over $418,000 in damages and over $788,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs following a lengthy arbitration. When the defendant moved the Superior Court to vacate the award, the court not only denied the motion but also awarded the firm’s client its fees and costs incurred in connection with the motion.
In Fanfare Investments v. FS Concepts (AAA, Los Angeles) the firm defended the regional franchisor for Fantastic Sams hair salons in Hawaii against the claims of a franchisee who alleged fraud and violation of the California Franchise Investment Law. The firm obtained an award which not only dismissed the franchisee’s claims, but also awarded the regional franchisor over $42,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs.
In Eagle Rider v. Eagle Rider Harley Rental of San Antonio (AAA, Los Angeles) the firm defended against a franchisee’s claim that his franchise was wrongfully terminated. The firm obtained a judgment in favor of the franchisor after a week-long arbitration hearing.
In Vallochia v. Cinque Amici LLC (Orange County Superior Court; Judicate West, Orange County) the firm defended against claims brought by a member of an LLC against the LLC regarding the ownership of a popular restaurant and the rights and duties of the members of the LLC. The arbitrator ruled in favor of the LLC after a two-day arbitration hearing.
In Shaw v. Iowa Grain Co., Kanz v. U.S. Futures and First Options Co., and Sussman v. Refco, Inc. (National Futures Association, Chicago) the firm arbitrated claims brought before the NFA alleging unauthorized trading, failure to liquidate open positions, and failure to supervise broker activity in customer accounts.
In Gregor v. Pacific Brokerage Services, Toro v. Bosworth, Beckney v. Chatfield Dean & Co., Jones v. Royal Alliance Associates, PKB Construction v. Santa Barbara Securities, Inc., Prudential Securities, Inc. v. Gordica, Kellner v. Paine Webber, Inc., Hazel L. Allan Trust v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., Appleton v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc., Simon v. Baraban Securities, Inc., Teiura v. Corporate Benefits Securities, Inc., Arafat v. W,J. Nolan & Co., Brandlin v. Bear, Stearns & Co., and Plycraft Industries v. BOA the firm arbitrated claims brought before the NASD alleging registration, fiduciary duty, and disclosure violations, among other claims, in connection with the offering and sale of financial products.
In Sign-A-Rama v. Mapel (AAA, Orange County) the firm arbitrated an action before the AAA on behalf of the franchisor, which resulted in the termination of the franchisee and an award of damages to the franchisor.
ADR Cases
CASES
