East Bay Running Store, Inc. v. Nike, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the \good cause\ requirement is not implicated without an initial finding that the franchisor terminated, cancelled, failed to renew, or substantially changed the competitive circumstances of the dealership agreement
• WFDL provision forbidding substantial change is intended to protect the dealer from constructive termination, not “non-discriminatory system-wide changes”
• WFDL provision forbidding substantial change is intended to protect the dealer from constructive termination, not “non-discriminatory system-wide changes”
• prohibition on sales by mail or telephone not a “substantial change in competitive circumstances of dealership agreement” under WFDL if applied to all dealers on “a non-discriminatory system-wide” basis
• WFDL does not prohibit “nondiscriminatory, system-wide” changes that are not an “underhanded attempt on the part of [the grantor] to drive any individual dealer out of business and thereby usurp the good will which that dealer had generated”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).