Franchisees and shareholders: The next wave of hotel litigation

Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly

Volumn 44, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 77-88

  Brewer, William A ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0043207253     PISSN: 00108804     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0010-8804(03)90272-2     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. See: Strategic Hotel Capital v. Marriott Int'l (Cal. Super. Ct., L.A. County); CTF Hotel Holdings, Inc. v. Marriott Int'l (D. Del.); Green Isle v. Ritz-Carlton (S.D. Fla.); In Town Hotels Limited Partnership v. Marriott Int'l (S.D. W. Va.); and Flately Family Trust v. Marriott Int'l (D. Mass.).
2. As explained in: James S. Renard and Kristi Motley, “The Agency Challenge: How Woolley, Woodley , and Other Cases Rearranged the Hotel-management Landscape”, on pages 58–76 of this Cornell Quarterly .
3. As occurred in: Empire Holdings, LLC v. Radisson Hotels International ; see: Ibid.
4. See: Daniel R. Lee How They Started Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly Vol. 26 No. 1 May 1985 27
5. See: Joan S. Livingston A Burst of Tiers Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly Vol. 26 No. 3 November 1985 34 35
6. th Cir.
7. See also: An agent is a fiduciary with respect to matters within the scope of his agency Restatement (Second) of Agency 1958 at Section 13
8. [F]iduciary duty arises out of an agency relationship Exxon Corp. v. Central Gulf Lines, Inc., 717 F. Supp. 1029 1031 1989 S.D.N.Y
9. An agent is a fiduciary Twomey v. Mitcham, Jones & Templeton, Inc., 262 Cal. App. 2d 690 709 1968 Several illustrations in the Restatement refer to hotel managers as agents; see, for example: p. 52, Illustration No. 3
10. The relevant cases are discussed in: Renard and Motley, op. cit. The cases are 2660 Woodley Rd. Joint Venture v. ITT Sheraton; Government Guar. of the Republic of Finland v. Hyatt Corp.; Pacific Landmark Hotel, Ltd. v. Marriott Hotel ; and Robert E. Wodley v. Embassy Suites . A non-hotel case with similar import is: Transport Clearings-Bay Area v. Simmonds , 226 Cal. App. 2d 405, 425 (Cal. Ct. App. 1964) (holding that the manager of a business is the general agent of the owner).
11. See: Bauer v. Sawyer, 8 Ill. 2d 351, 134 N.E.2d 329 1956
12. Chilli-o Sales, Inc. v. Lockman, 154 N.E.2d 315 1958
13. An order of divestiture occurred as a result of: Great Frame Up Sys., Inc. v. Jazayeri Enter., Inc., 789 F. 257 Supp 253 1992 N.D. Ill., Ill. Ct. App.
14. th Cir.
15. For example, see: Cherne Ind., Inc. v. Grounds & Assoc., Inc., 278 N.W2d 81 94 1979 Minn.
16. See: Government Guar. of the Republic of Finland v. Hyatt Corp; and 2600 Woodley Road joint Venture v. ITT Sheraton. A nonhotel case was: Foster v. Springfield Clinic, 410 N.E.2d 604 609 1980 The case law on which this case is based stretches back to 1895, Ill. App. Ct.
17. For example, see: Kinzbach Tool Co. v. Corbett-Wallace Corp., 138 Tex. 565, 574, 160 S.W2d 509, 513-14 1942 See also: Restatement at Section 403
18. See: Douglas v. Aztec Petroleum Corp., 695 S.W2d 312 318 1985 relying in part on the Restatement
19. Piro v. Sarofim Apr. 11, 2002 Tex. App. LEXIS 2656 Tex. App.—Houston Affirming award of forfeiture of fees
20. See: Burrow v. Arce, 997 S.W2d 229 238 1999 Tex.
21. See also: Restatement at Section 469. A real-estate case was TPL Assocs. v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc. 536 N.YS.2d 754 757 1989 App. Div.
22. As explained in: Renard and Motley, op. cit.
23. For example, see: McDonald's Corp. v. Watson, 69 F.3d 36 43 1995 5th Cir.
24. O-Neat v. Burger ChefSys., Inc., 860 F.2d 1341 1349 1988 6th Cir.
25. th Cit.
26. The three-element test was used, for instance, in: Hofherr v. Dart Indus., Inc., 853 E2d 259 262 1988 4th Cit.
27. This has occurred in other industries, as well. For example, stock analysis: Wiener v. Lazard Freres & Co., 1998 Slip Op. 03505, 672 N.Y.2d 8, 13 1998 1st Dept.
28. advertising: Northeast Gen. Corp. v. Wellington Adver., Inc., 82 N.Y2d 158, 162, 624 N.E.2d 129, 131, 604 N.Y.S.2d 1,3 1993
29. ∗6 1995 Sup. Ct. N.Y Co.
30. ∗2 1998 6th Cit.
31. th Cir.
32. See, for instance: Welinsky v. Resort of the World D.N. V., 839 F .2d 928 930 1988 2d Cir.
33. Gelfand v. Tanner Motors Tours, Ltd., 385 F2d 116 121 1967 2d Cir.
34. See: Sbarro Holdings, Inc. v. Yuan, 111 Misc. 2d 910, 912, 445 N.Y.S.2d 911, 913 1981 Sup. Ct. Kings Co
35. As occurred in: S&R Corp. v. Jiffy Lube Int'l, Inc., 968 E2d 371, 375 1992 3d Cit.
36. New York Times Oct. 13, 2002 Business Section
37. Lisa Bannon Marriott International Labors to Combat Short-selling Surge Wall Street Journal Sept. 26, 2002 C3
38. Ibid
39. Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse May 29, 2003 as reviewed
40. See: Mukesh Bajaj Sumon C. Mazumdar Atulya Sarin (quoting from and relying on information published in the Securities Class Action Alert) Securities Class Action Settlements: An Empirical Analysis November 16, 2000 as viewed on May 29, 2003
41. Prepared testimony of Arthur Levitt, chairman, SEC, before the House Subcomm. on Telecomms. and Fin., Comm. on Commerce, Fed News Serv. , February 10, 1995.
42. See: In re Oxford Health Plans, Inc. Sec. Litig., 128 F.R.D. 42,49 1998 S.D.N.Y.
43. See, for example: Basic Inc. v. Levinson 1988 where the U.S. Supreme Court indicates a presumption of reliance in public misrepresentations to support claims in a class action 485 U.S. 224, 245
44. See: Kirkpatrick u J. C. Bradford & Co., 827 E2d 718, 722-25 1987 11th Cir.
45. Lipton v. Documation, Inc., 734 E2d 740, 743 1983 11th Cir.
46. th Cir.
47. See: Host Marriott Loss Widens Washington Post Oct. 17, 2002 E02
48. See: In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 286, 286 2001 3d Cir.
49. See: In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 60 F. Supp.2d 354, 359 1999 D. N.J.
50. For example, see: Provenz v. Miller, 102 E3d 1478, 1489 1996 9th Cir.
51. See: In re Livent Inc. Sec. Litig., 78 F. Supp.2d 194, 213 1999 S.D.N.Y
52. see also: Provenz , 102 F. 3d at 1483, 1489-90.
53. See: City of Philadelphia v. Fleming Co., 264 E3d 1245, 1261 2001 1oth Cir.
54. Securities and Exch. Comm'n v. Caserta, 75 F. Supp.2d 79, 90 1999 E.D.N.Y
55. See: 17 C.ER. 4 210.4-01(a)(1) 2002
56. and Securities and Exchange Commission , 75 E Supp.2d at 90.