STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT. NO. 'zo't~% 4. The State of Washington (State), by and through its attorneys, Robert W.

Similar documents
8 IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING NO. 9 PROVISIONS IHOP FRANCHISOR LLC 10 ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 11 I. PARTIES

BUDGET BLINDS, LLC'S ASSURANCE 9 POACHING PROVISIONS OF DISCONTINUANCE

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT NO.

8 No. IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING 9 PROVISIONS WINGSTOP RESTAURANTS INC. ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 10

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT NO. General (the Attorney General ), and Eric S. Newman, Assistant Attorney General, files this

I. PARTIES. dba Denny's, relating to certain provisions utilized in its franchise agreements.

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT NO. General (the Attorney General ), and Eric S. Newman, Assistant Attorney General, files this

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNT' SUPERIOR COURT r? NO. 5 5Z - 4 5LA. 1. t3 t 2- r b I i tala' 5. L_ L-C- QUIZ HOLDINGS, LLC ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE

8 IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING Wei PROVISIONS 9 LITTLE CAESAR ENTERPRISES, 10 INC. ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 11 I. PARTIES

L PARTIES. Pizza LLC ("Domino's") and other quick service restaurant franchisors relating to certain

8 IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING NO. 9 PROVISIONS BURGER KING CORPORATION 10 ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 11 I. PARTIES

PROVISIONS JAMBA JUICE COMPANY'S ASSURANCE OF 14 DISCONTINUANCE. Assurance of Discontinuance ("AOD") pursuant RCW

8 IN RE: FRANCHISE NO 9 POACHING PROVISIONS ANYTIME FITNESS, LLC 10 ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 11

on,~3p TIN STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT NO, The State of Washington, by and through its attorneys, Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney

The State of Washington, by and through its attorneys, Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney

Assurance of Discontinuance ("AOD") pursuant to RCW I. PARTIES

20 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. GNC is a global specialty retailer of health, wellness and

NO. VALVOLINE INSTANT OIL 10 CHANGE FRANCHISING, INC. ASSURANCE OF 11 DISCONTINUANCE

9 IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING NO.'~ PROVISIONS 10 MENCHIE'S GROUP, INC. (MENCHIE'S GROUP, INC.)

STATE OF WASHINGTON DING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING I NO. PROVISIONS A&W RESTAURANTS, INC. ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE

NO. 9 PIZZA HUT, LLC ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 10. Assurance of Discontinuance ("AOD") pursuant RCW

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT DISCONTINUANCE V.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING

NO Attorney for Judgment Creditor: Audrey Udashen 23 Assistant Attorney General

STATE OF WASHINGTON, KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT. Defendants.

STATE OF FLORIDA, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. An Agreement among the Offices of the Attorneys General of the States and

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING. DISCONTINUANCE WEIDNER PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LLC, Defendant.

Office of the Attorney General State of Florida Department of Legal Affairs

STATE OF WASIDNGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

!! 1 Page! 2014 PEODepot. All rights reserved. PEODepot and peodepot.com are trademarks of PEODepot. INITIAL! BROKER AGREEMENT

Case 2:06-cv RSM Document 30 Filed 05/04/2006 Page 1 of 6

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SPOKANE STATE OF WASHINGTON, NO Plaintiff, I.

~/

INDEPENDENT SALES AGENCY TERMS AND CONDITIONS

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WALLA WALLA. Plaintiff, Defendant. I. INTRODUCTION

Introduction. by Filippo Balestrieri, 1 Federico G. Mantovanelli, 2 and Shannon Seitz 3 ; Analysis Group, Inc.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. Plaintiffs, )

Case 3:11-cv BHS Document 1 Filed 07/14/11 Page 1 of 15

SECURITY AGREEMENT RECITALS

Applicant Co Applicant. Address. City State Zip. Home Phone# Cell Phone# Address Birth Date DL# SS# Sponsor Name

Case 2:06-cv RSM Document 26 Filed 04/17/2006 Page 1 of 10

(01/31/13) Principal Name /PIA No. PAYMENT AND INDEMNITY AGREEMENT No.

~/

TERMS OF USE AGREEMENT

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE

INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT

~/

~/

STREETBLAST MEDIA, LLC. PO BOX 176 FAIRDALE, KENTUCKY 40118

US v Matagorda County Decree UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS GALVESTON DIVISION

TARGA NGL PIPELINE COMPANY LLC NOTICE OF OPEN SEASON

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VO LUNT ARY COMPLIANCE

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

~/

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

Practices Act", Florida Statutes (2010), the STATE OF FLORIDA, OFFICE OF THE

NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AND FINAL APPROVAL HEARING YOUR ESTIMATED PAYMENT INFORMATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

TRADEMARK LICENSE AGREEMENT

HIPAA DATA USE AGREEMENT

NON-EXCLUSIVE LICENSE FOR USE OF SCHOOL WORDMARKS AND LOGOS

DISCOVERY CLEAN WATER ALLIANCE ADMINISTRATIVE LEAD AGREEMENT

AWS Certification Program Agreement

Case5:09-cv JW Document146-3 Filed08/25/11 Page1 of 13. Exhibit A-2

Corporate Bylaws of the Great Western Franchisee Association

Case 2:16-cv JHS Document 16 Filed 07/12/17 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA OPINION

~/

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

Case Document 1058 Filed in TXSB on 09/14/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. lj'lhed States FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS E,.'/';~rn DiStrict. HOUSTON DIVISION CONSENT DECREE

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOSHIBA ENTITIES AND THE STATE OF ILLINOIS REGARDING CRT ANTITRUST LITIGATION

* * * TONY L. SCHAFFER, * Respondent *

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

(129th General Assembly) (Amended Substitute House Bill Number 383) AN ACT

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PORT OF SEATTLE AND THE CITY OF

GENERAL APPLICATION AND AGREEMENT OF INDEMNITY CONTRACTORS FORM

RETS DATA ACCESS AGREEMENT

NO. 14 The Plaintiff, State of Washington, by and through its attorneys Robert W. Ferguson,

Title 5: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND SERVICES

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY. Plaintiff, Defendant.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG

Case Document 1045 Filed in TXSB on 09/13/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

~/

~/

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA

WYNN RESORTS, LIMITED (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

~/

Bylaws Adopted August 27, JeffCo Aquatic Coalition 1 Port Townsend, Washington. Table of Contents

WASHINGTON COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740

SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT. THIS SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT ( Agreement ) is

Connecticut Multiple Listing Service, Inc.

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

Your legal rights are affected whether you act or don t act. Please read this Notice carefully.

NO. C A AGREED FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

AGREEMENT AMONG LICENSORS REGARDING THE 1394 STANDARD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT NO. I. INTRODUCTION

Transcription:

1 REC I ~ u. l E 2 3 NOV 2 20 F 4 5 % T gist- Cow Cie (f 7 STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT 8 9 12 IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING PROVISIONS NO. 'zo't~% 4 ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 14 15 20 The State of Washington (State), by and through its attorneys, Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney General, and Rahul Rao, Assistant Attorney General, files this Assurance of Discontinuance (AOD) pursuant RCW.8.0. I. PARTIES 1.1 In January 20, the Attorney General initiated an investigation into Sport Clips, Inc. relating to its hiring practices. 1.2 Sport Clips, Inc. ("SCI") is a Texas corporation with its principal office or place of business in Georgetown, Texas. SCI is in the business of owning and franchising hair salons. 1.3 The term "SCI" includes its directors, officers, managers, agents acting within the scope of their agency, and employees as well as its successor and assigns, controlled subsidiaries, divisions, groups, affiliates, partnerships, and joint ventures. 1 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON

1 II. INVESTIGATION 2 2.1 There are approximately 40 Sport Clips stores in the state of Washington. All of 3 these stores are owned and operated by franchisees and none are owned and operated by SCI. 4 2.2 In the past, SCI has included language in its franchise agreements that restricted 5 a franchisee's ability to solicit or hire workers from another Sport Clips store ("no-poaching provision"). Specifically, the standard Sport Clips franchise agreement in Article XIV stated that 7 a franchisee could not: 8 Employ or seek to employ any person who is at that time employed by the 9 Franchisor or by any other Sport Clips franchisee or Area Developer of the Franchisor, or otherwise directly or indirectly induce such person to leave his or her employment, whether that person is employed directly or through a Professional Employer Organization (PEO), commonly referred to as `employee leasing'. 12 2.3 The Attorney General asserts that the foregoing conduct constitutes a contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade in violation of the Consumer Protection Act, 14 RCW.8.030. 15 2.4 SCI expressly denies the conduct described above constitutes a contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade in violation of the Consumer Protection Act, RCW.8.030, or any other law, and expressly denies that it has engaged in conduct that constitutes a contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade, or violates any other law or regulation. SCI enters into this AOD to avoid protracted and expensive litigation, and 20 because it has already removed the no-poaching provision from its standard franchise agreement. Pursuant to RCW.8.0, neither this AOD nor its terms shall be construed as an admission of law, fact, liability, misconduct, or wrongdoing on the part of SCI. 2 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON

1 III. 2 3.1 Subject to paragraph 2.4 above, SCI agrees: 3 3.1.1. It has removed the no poaching provision from its standard franchise 4 agreement and it will no longer include no-poaching provisions in any of its future franchise 5 agreements; 3.1.2. It has never enforced any no-poaching provisions in any of its past or 7 existing franchise agreements, and it will not in the future seek to intervene in any action g involving a current SCI franchisee to defend a no-poaching provision, including any litigation 9 in which an SCI franchisee may claim third-party beneficiary status rights to enforce a no-poach provision; 3.1.3. It will notify all of its franchisees, nationwide and in writing, of SCI's 12 policy and commitment to not enforcing any anti-poaching language in franchise agreements which contain the language, as well as provide notice of entry of this AOD and a copy thereof. 14 It will further notify all of its franchisees that, to the extent that the anti-poaching language is 15 present in existing Franchise Agreements, SCI unilaterally deletes the anti-poaching language from the Franchise Agreement as SCI is authorized to do under Article XIV.H of the Franchise Agreements. SCI will notify the Attorney General's Office if it learns of any effort by a 1 8 franchisee to enforce any existing no-poach provision. SCI's notice to franchisees under this paragraph may be provided electronically. 20 3.2 Within 30 days of entry of this AOD, SCI will have sent notice to all of its franchisees of SCI's deletion of the anti-poaching language in Franchise Agreements. If any franchise owner objects to the deletion of the anti-poaching language, SCI shall provide the name and address of the resisting franchisee and the name and address of the franchisee's registered agent to the Office of the Attorney General. 3.3 As Franchise Agreements come up for either renewal, or if a franchise is sold 1 to a new owner, it is SCI's practice, and a requirement under all Franchise Agreements, that 3 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON (20) 44-7744

I upon renewal or transfer, the renewing franchisee or new franchise owner must sign a new 2 Franchise Agreement. At this time, SCI will tender to the franchisee its current franchise 3 agreement on a nationwide basis that has a no-poaching provision. 4 3.4 Within 30 days of the conclusion of the time periods referenced in this section 5 1, SCI will submit a declaration to the Attorney General's Office signed under penalty of perjury stating that all provisions of this agreement have been satisfied. 7 IV. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS 8 4.1 This AOD is binding on, and applies to SCI, including each of its respective 9 directors, officers, managers, agents acting within the scope of their agency, and employees, as well as their respective successors and assigns, controlled subsidiaries, divisions, groups, affiliates, partnerships, and joint ventures, or other entities through which SCI may now or 12 hereafter act with respect to the conduct alleged in this AOD. 4.2 This is a voluntary agreement and it shall not be construed as an admission of 14 law, fact, liability, misconduct, or wrongdoing on the part of SCI. By entering into this AOD, 15 SCI does not agree or concede that the claims, allegations and/or causes of action, which have or could have been asserted by the Attorney General, have merit and SCI expressly denies any such claims, allegations, and/or causes of action. However, proof of failure to comply with this AOD shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of RCW.8.030, thereby placing upon the violator the burden of defending against imposition by the Court of injunctions, restitution, 20 costs and reasonable attorney's fees, and civil penalties of up to $2,000.00 per violation. 4.3 SCI will not, nor will it authorize any of its officers, employees, representatives, or agents to state or otherwise contend that the State of Washington or the Attorney General has approved of, or has otherwise sanctioned, the conduct described in Paragraph 2.2 with respect to the No-Poaching Provision in SCI's franchise agreement. 4.4 This AOD resolves all issues raised by the State of Washington and the Antitrust Division of the Attorney General's Office under the Consumer Protection Act and any other 4 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON

1 related statutes pertaining to the acts set forth in paragraph 2.1 2.3 above that may have occurred 2 before the date of entry of this AOD and concludes the investigation thereof. Subject to 3 paragraph 4.2, the State of Washington and the of the Attorney General's 4 Office shall not file suit or take any further investigative or enforcement action with respect to the 5 acts set forth above that occurred before the date of entry of this AOD. 7 APPROVED ON this day of 20. 8 9 JUDGE/COURT COMISSIONER 12 14 15 20 5 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON

1 2 3 Presented by: ROBERT W. FERGUSON Attorney General 4 5 7 8 9 12 14 15 20 RAHUL RAO, WSBA #53375 Assistant Attorney General Attorneys for State of Washington Office of the Attorney General Seattle, WA 984 (20) 442-4499 rahulr@atg.wa.gov Agreed to and approved for entry by: SPORT CLIPS, INC. Phillip Haberthur, Attorney 805 Broadway Street, Suite 00 P.O. Box 8 Pal Vancouver, WA 98-8 (30) 8-20 philh@landerholm.com u' k 0 OV4_1 Deborah L. Taylor Attorney at Law 3730 Kirby Drive, Suite 1200 4277 Houston, TX 77098 (7) 50-3000 deborah@dlynnetaylor.com ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON