Mac's Shell Service, Inc. v. Shell Oil Products Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that franchisee needs to show that the franchisor directly or indirectly put an “end to the franchisee’s… purchase of the franchisor’s fuel, or occupation of the franchisor’s service station[,]” to bring a claim for constructive termination under PMPA
• observing that “a franchisee who continues operating a franchise ... has not had the franchise terminated in either the ordinary or technical sense of the word” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• observing that “a franchisee who continues operating a franchise . . . has not had the franchise terminated in either the ordinary or technical sense of the word” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• discussing 15 U'.S.C. § 2805(b)(2)(A)(ii), a statute that “substantially relaxes the normal standard for obtaining preliminary-injunctive relief’
• discussing 15 U.S.C. § 2805(b)(2)(A)(ii), a statute that \substantially relaxes the normal standard for obtaining preliminary-injunctive relief\
• declining to interpret the PMPA as federalizing violations of state laws regulating franchise agreements

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).