SUBURBAN LEISURE CENTER, INC. V. AMF BOWLING PRODUCTS, INC.
468 F.3d 523 (8th Cir. 2006)
NATURE OF THE CASE: AMF (D) appealed from an order of the district court denying its motion to dismiss or in the alternative to compel arbitration and stay proceedings with regard to claims brought by Suburban (P) after D terminated its oral franchise agreement with P.
FACTS: P and D entered into an oral franchise agreement for P to have the right use the AMF trade name, trademark, or service mark in order to sell pool tables and related accessories. They executed a written E-Commerce Dealer Agreement. The e-commerce agreement provides that '[t]he determination of any dispute or claim arising under the Agreement or any invoice or agreement executed pursuant to this Agreement will be settled by binding arbitration in Richmond, Virginia.' It also has a merger clause which states that the '[a]greement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supercedes all prior agreement[s], oral and written.' D sent a termination letter which made no mention of the e-commerce agreement. P sued for damages from the cancellation of the oral franchise agreement. D removed the matter to federal court. D then filed a motion to dismiss or in the alternative to compel arbitration. The district court found that the e-commerce agreement did not address P's ability to promote or sell D's products, it concluded that Suburban's underlying claims did not arise under the e-commerce agreement. It denied D's motion and D appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND
DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
No comments:
Post a Comment