![]() Unsurprisingly, the court refused to grant summary judgment for either party because the particular facts matter quite a lot.Īs the court noted, Florida’s Beer Franchise Law requires that “good cause” for purposes of terminating an exclusive distribution franchise, requires five elements: ![]() ![]() This means that summary judgment is only appropriate where the law is so clearly on one side or the other that the specific facts do not matter. A fact is material if it may affect the outcome of the case. A court may grant summary judgment in a party’s favor only if there is no genuine dispute as to any material facts. Glunz Beer countered that it’s termination did comply with the Franchise Law and asked the court to declare that Glunz Beer was entitled to appoint a new distributor.īoth sides filed motions for summary judgment. Micro Man filed a lawsuit against Glunz Beer and asked the court to declare that Glunz Beer did not have “good cause” for terminating the franchise, which is required under the Franchise Law. The letter provided a termination date at the end of May 2013. Glunz Beer’s termination letter stated that termination was because Micro Man had failed to establish a sales presence throughout Florida and had failed to provide a corrective plan of action. Glunz Beer sent Micro Man a termination letter in February 2013. Micro Man did begin serving the World of Beer chain in the Florida Keys in February 2013, but it did not take other steps to service the Florida Panhandle or distribute to Publix. Micro Man did not submit a corrective plan of action. Finally, the Notice of Deficiencies informed Micro Man that it would have 90 days to cure the three identified deficiencies or else its exclusive distribution franchise for Florida would be terminated. The Notice of Deficiencies gave Micro Man 30 days to provide a written plan of actions it proposed to correct the failures. Glunz Beer sent to Micro Man, via certified mail, a Notice of Deficiencies which specifically three failures: (1) Micro Man’s failure to provide sales coverage through Florida, (2) Micro Man’s failure to sell Stiegl beer to Publix, and (3) Micro Man’s failure to pay Glunz Beer’s invoices timely. In December 2012, Glunz Beer initiated the termination of Micro Man’s franchise following the procedure laid out in Florida’s Beer Franchise Law. Glunz Beer Provides Notice of Termination Glunz Beer offered to buy back Micro Man’s franchise for part or all of Florida, which Micro Man also refused. Glunz Beer also asked Micro Man to distribute Stiegl beer to Publix, Florida’s largest grocery store chain, which Micro Man refused. Micro Man refused Glunz Beer’s request to prioritize distribution in the Florida Keys. Soon after acquiring the Stiegl contract, Glunz Beer learned that Micro Man did not have the ability to distribute beer in the Florida Panhandle or the Florida Keys. ![]() Glunz Beer and Micro Man did not have a written contract. The prior importer had given Micro Man the exclusive franchise to distribute Stiegl beer in all of Florida, and Glunz Beer continued to use Micro Man as its distributor in Florida. In April 2012, Glunz Beer acquired the exclusive contract to import beer manufactured by Stiegl Brewer in Austria. is a valuable look at what contributed to a beer supplier’s decision to terminate a distributor’s franchise, how the beer supplier handled the termination, and whether termination was permitted under the Franchise Law. District Court’s 2014 opinion in the case of Micro Man Distributors, Inc. There are very few written case opinions addressing a supplier’s attempt to terminate a Florida distributor’s franchise. For instance, the Franchise Law controls whether a supplier can terminate the distributor’s exclusive franchise. In disputes between a supplier and its distributor, the Franchise Law describes the rights of both parties. The Franchise Law is a long, complicated statute that requires each beer supplier to grant a Florida distributor the exclusive right (called a “franchise”) to distribute the supplier’s beer in the all or part of the state. At the heart of the relationship between suppliers and distributors is Florida’s Beer Franchise Law, Florida Statutes Section 563.022. Florida’s Beer Franchise Lawįlorida Beverage Law requires beer manufacturers and importers to work with beer distributors.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |