|
|
Wisconsin Fair Dealership Case Law Update: F&C Flooring Distributors, Inc. v. Junckers Hardwood
|
Published: December 4, 2009
Author: Robert Procter
Axley
Brynelson's Distribution and Franchise Team publishes the Wisconsin
Fair Dealership Case Law Update as an online resource for developments
in the Wisconsin Fair Dealership Law.
F&C Flooring Distributors, Inc. v. Junckers Hardwood, Inc.
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, December 4, 2009
Facts: F&C Flooring Distributors distributes
hardwood floors manufactured by Junckers Hardwood, Inc. F&C Flooring
Distributors began distributing Junckers’ floors in 2004. In late 2006,
Junckers downsized its business and F&C Flooring Distributors became
dissatisfied with the level of service provided by Junckers. By the end
of 2008, the parties’ relationship had for the most part ended.
F&C Flooring Distributors filed this lawsuit alleging that Junckers
violated the Wisconsin Fair Dealership Law. Junckers moved for summary
judgment asking the Court to dismiss the lawsuit claiming that there was
not a community of interest to justify a finding that F&C Flooring
Distributors was a protected dealer under the statute. The Court looked
at all of the facets of the relationship and determined that the
revenues and profits generated by the distributorship were only slightly
more than 5% of F&C’s Flooring Distributors’ gross profits in 2006
and less than 2% in 2007 and less than 3% in 2008.
Ruling: The Court determined that such figures indicate that
defendant did not have the “plaintiff over a barrel.” The Court looked
at the other factors and found that the plaintiff could not show that
the loss of Junckers’s brands would translate into drastically reduced
sales or that it would affect sales of plaintiff’s other lines. The
Court stated that the community of interest standard is a demanding one
and that the record could not support the plaintiff’s assertion that the
defendant had it “over a barrel.” Thus, the Court determined that no
reasonable fact finder could conclude that the relationship between the
parties involved a community of interest. Accordingly, the Court
determined no dealership exists within the meaning of the Wisconsin Fair
Dealership Law.
Bottom Line: This case is an illustration of the factual analysis
done by courts when determining whether a distributor is a protected
dealer under the statute; however, it followed the “over the barrel”
line of analysis, which has subsequently been abandoned by the Wisconsin
Court of Appeals. See The Water Quality Store, LLC v. Dynasty Spas, Inc..
For more information about the Wisconsin Fair Dealership Law, contact Robert Procter at 608.283.6762 or rprocter@axley.com.
Axley Brynelson is pleased to provide articles, legal alerts, podcasts and videos for informational purposes, but we are not giving legal advice or creating an attorney/client relationship by providing this information. The law constantly changes, and our publications may not be currently updated. Before relying on any legal information of a general nature, please consult legal counsel as to your particular situation. While our attorneys welcome your comments and questions, keep in mind that any information you provide us, unless you are now a client, will not be confidential.
|
|
