Legal Opinion
McGowan v. Pillsbury Co.
District Court, W.D. Washington
Decided March 13, 1989No. C85-1488ZPublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
ZILLY, District Judge.
This case arises from the formation, purchase and operation of a Haagen-Dazs shoppe franchise under an agreement dated June 9, 1982 (“Franchise Agreement”). The complaint, filed by the franchisee, includes claims against various Haagen-Dazs defendants for, among other things, breach of contract, fraud, antitrust violations, and violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act and Franchise Investment Protection Act.
This dispute arises from the purchase and operation of a Haagen-Dazs franchise in Kirkland, Washington, by plaintiffs Kenneth and Robert McGowan and…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Calder v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- T.W. Electrical Service, Inc. v. Pacific Electrical Contractors Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Carlock v. Pillsbury Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1989
- Miller v. U.S. BankCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1994
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Whiteman Tire, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1997
- JM Vidal, Inc. v. Texdis USA, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2011
- AAA Delivery, Inc. v. Airborne FreightLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1994
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.