Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

My Pie International, Inc., Cross-Appellant v. Debould, Inc., Dowmont, Inc., Arnold Germain and Judith Germain, Cross-Appellees

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided August 17, 1982No. 81-2418, 81-2443 and 81-2583Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partEschbach, Circuit Judge

While I concur in the majority’s affirmance of the district court’s judgment on the trademark infringement and trade secrets issues, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that defendants are entitled to rescind their contracts and that Debould is entitled to prevail on its counterclaim by virtue of the Illinois Franchise Disclosure Act, Ill.Rev.Stat. ch. 121½, §§ 701-40 (1981).

Facts

In the latter part of 1974 and early 1975, two sophisticated businessmen, Germain and Beadle, became interested in opening a My Pie restaurant and scouted potential locations in the western suburbs…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Wood Acceptance Co. v. KingAppellate Court of Illinois · 1974
  2. Guhl v. GuhlIllinois Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Brandt v. PhippsIllinois Supreme Court · 1947
  4. Marguerite Irwin v. West End Development Company, a Colorado CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1973
  5. Farmers Automobile Insurance v. PursleyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1971

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API