Coast to Coast Stores, Inc. v. Gruschus
Washington Supreme Court
1DissentDore, J.
(dissenting) — The issue involved here is whether the franchisor, by foreclosing on a business inventory pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code, can avoid the protective provisions for the franchisee in the 1971 Franchise Investment Protection Act (Franchise Act), as amended, and not pay the franchisee the reasonable market value of his inventory.
The majority holds that the Uniform Commercial Code, harmonized with the Franchise Act, allows the franchisor to completely avoid the inventory provisions of the Franchise Act without giving notice of forfeiture to the franchisee. The franchisor…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Salois v. Mutual of Omaha InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1978
- State v. LoewenWashington Supreme Court · 1982
- Anhold v. DanielsWashington Supreme Court · 1980
- Keyes v. BollingerCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1982
- Golberg v. SanglierWashington Supreme Court · 1982
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.