Franchisors frequently become embroiled in contract disputes with their franchisees. Many franchisors have cases pending against their franchisees for breach of the franchise agreement in district courts across the country. In each case, franchisors are facing, not only different franchisees, but also different judges, opposing counsel, and local counsel. Predicting timing, outcomes, and cost is essential to evaluating and resolving franchise claims.
Franchisors (and their counsel) need a data tool that provides insights into the litigation process when the parties are litigating a breach of franchise agreement claim. Data on the court, the judge, opposing counsel, the franchisor’s counsel, timing of key events, and likely resolutions is critical to evaluating all aspects of the case and formulating litigation strategy. Lex Machina provides analytics that assist counsel in developing litigation strategy both before and after a lawsuit has been filed.
Franchisors and their counsel can utilize Lex Machina’s Contracts data set to implement winning strategies in any federal jurisdiction and with any judge. The Contracts module contains over 147,000 cases. Lex Machine has developed a unique “Franchise Agreement” case tag, so that attorneys can focus on cases involving breach of a franchise agreement. This dataset includes over 6,600 cases that are most relevant to franchisors.
Top Franchise Case Jurisdictions
Where are franchise cases being litigated? Franchisors are able to use analytics to determine where franchise agreement cases are most frequently litigated. The District of New Jersey has the most franchise agreement cases and has seen 20% of the franchise agreement cases pending since 2009.
It is critical for both franchisors and franchisees to know which law firms have experience litigating franchise cases. Franchisors need to dive into the data to determine which firms are representing plaintiffs and defendants in Franchise Agreement disputes. LeClairRyan leads the list of top law firms with 672 Franchise cases (in 660 of these, LeClairRyan represented the plaintiff). Gray Plant Mooty has represented plaintiffs in 359 franchise cases.
Ground-Level, Data-Driven Decision Making for Injunctive Relief
Franchisors frequently seek injunctive relief to prevent defaulting franchisors from continuing to use their intellectual property. Is it a good strategy to seek injunctive relief early in the litigation? Lex Machina’s motion metrics assist counsel in making informed decisions about seeking injunctive relief at different stages of the litigation.
Minimize Litigation Risk
Lex Machina’s data enables you to find and analyze cases that are similar to yours. Create realistic litigation budgets by viewing time to key milestones in specific courts and comparing them to other jurisdictions. Predict how your judge will behave. Legal Analytics is all about winning strategies. Going beyond anecdotal evidence to data-driven strategies allows attorneys to be more competitive and efficient.
This is a condensed version of Lex Machina’s Using Contracts Analytics in Franchise Disputes. Click here to request your copy.
Find out more! Specific insights like these are available in Lex Machina’s Contracts Litigation Report.