| dbo:abstract
|
- Scheck v. Burger King Corp. (756 F. Supp. 543 (S.D. Fla. 1991) was a case of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida in which it considered motions for summary judgement brought by defendant Burger King Corporation concerning four counts raised by Plaintiff Scheck who alleged that defendant "breached an implied non-competition agreement (Count I), an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (Count II) an implied contract created by promissory estoppel (Count III) and the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act" which plaintiff alleged incorporates the proceeding three claims. Burger King moved for summary judgement on the basis that Scheck's claims were insufficient "as a matter of law", were barred by the Massachusetts Statute of Frauds, or were released by the plaintiff as a direct result of two releases executed by Scheck in 1985 and 1986, respectively. The case invoked legal questions concerning the covenant of good faith and fair dealing related to legal protection of the territory rights of franchisees. (en)
|
| dbo:thumbnail
| |
| dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
| |
| dbo:wikiPageID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageLength
|
- 25385 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
|
| dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
| |
| dbp:citations
| |
| dbp:court
| |
| dbp:dateDecided
| |
| dbp:decisionBy
| |
| dbp:fullName
|
- Steven A. SCHECK, Plaintiff, v. BURGER KING CORPORATION, Defendant. (en)
|
| dbp:judges
| |
| dbp:name
|
- Scheck v. Burger King Corp. (en)
|
| dbp:opinions
|
- Florida Law governs this case; Defendant's Affirmative Defenses of Release and Statute of Frauds are denied and dismissed; Defendant's motion for summary judgement as to the claim in count 1 of an implied non-competition agreement is granted and count 1 is dismissed; Defendant's motion for summary judgement as to the claim in count 2 of an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is denied; Defendant's motion for summary judgement as to the claim in count 3 of an implied contract and assertion of promissory estoppel is granted and count 3 is dismissed; Defendant's motion for summary judgement as to the claim in count 4 of violations of the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act is granted and count 4 is dismissed. (en)
|
| dbp:transcripts
| |
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
| dcterms:subject
| |
| rdfs:comment
|
- Scheck v. Burger King Corp. (756 F. Supp. 543 (S.D. Fla. 1991) was a case of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida in which it considered motions for summary judgement brought by defendant Burger King Corporation concerning four counts raised by Plaintiff Scheck who alleged that defendant "breached an implied non-competition agreement (Count I), an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (Count II) an implied contract created by promissory estoppel (Count III) and the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act" which plaintiff alleged incorporates the proceeding three claims. Burger King moved for summary judgement on the basis that Scheck's claims were insufficient "as a matter of law", were barred by the Massachusetts Statute of Frauds, or were release (en)
|
| rdfs:label
|
- Scheck v. Burger King Corp. (en)
|
| owl:sameAs
| |
| prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
| foaf:depiction
| |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
| is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
of | |
| is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |
