The actual authority of a franchisor is similar to Language of the Court that of an...

 

Transcribed Image Text:

"The actual authority of a franchisor is similar to Language of the Court that of an independent contractor." -Love, Judge Facts Accor North America LLC is a franchisor that grants franchises to operate Motel 6 motels. Bayou Hospitality LLC obtained a franchise to operate a Motel 6 in New Orleans, Louisiana. Jorge Espinosa was staying at the Bayou Motel 6 when he was shot by an armed robber in the motel parking lot. The shooting rendered Espinosa a paraplegic. Espinosa sued Bayou, alleging that it was negligent because a portion of the motel's fence around the parking lot was missing, thus enabling the armed robber to enter the premises and shoot him. Espinosa also sued Accor, alleging that Accor, as the franchisor, was vicariously liable for the alleged negligence of the Bayou franchisee. Accor filed a motion for sum- mary judgment contending that it owed no duty to Espinosa because it did not control the day-to- day operations of the Bayou Motel 6 franchise. The court granted Accor's motion for summary judg ment and removed Accor as a defendant in the case. Espinosa appealed. Vicarious liability does not apply when an independent contractor relationship exists. The most important test in determining whether or not an independent contractor relationship exists involves the control over the teork. The actual authority of a franchisor is similar to that of an independent contrac- tor. The franchise agreement provides that the safety and security of the motel patrons was Bayou's sole responsibility. Bayou was solely responsible for all employee decisions. Accor did not manage the motel. Conclusively, the evidence demonstrates that Accor did not have the authority to exercise control over the day-to-day operations of the motel. Decision The court of appeals affirmed the trial court's deci- sion that Accor, the franchisor, was not liable for the shooting of Espinosa by a third party at a Motel 6 franchise. Critical Legal Thinking Questions Do you think patrons stay at chain motels because they rely on the safety of these motels? Can you think of something that Accor might have done that Issue Is the franchisor liable for the franchisee's would have prevented it from being removed as a defendant in this case? negligence? "The actual authority of a franchisor is similar to Language of the Court that of an independent contractor." -Love, Judge Facts Accor North America LLC is a franchisor that grants franchises to operate Motel 6 motels. Bayou Hospitality LLC obtained a franchise to operate a Motel 6 in New Orleans, Louisiana. Jorge Espinosa was staying at the Bayou Motel 6 when he was shot by an armed robber in the motel parking lot. The shooting rendered Espinosa a paraplegic. Espinosa sued Bayou, alleging that it was negligent because a portion of the motel's fence around the parking lot was missing, thus enabling the armed robber to enter the premises and shoot him. Espinosa also sued Accor, alleging that Accor, as the franchisor, was vicariously liable for the alleged negligence of the Bayou franchisee. Accor filed a motion for sum- mary judgment contending that it owed no duty to Espinosa because it did not control the day-to- day operations of the Bayou Motel 6 franchise. The court granted Accor's motion for summary judg ment and removed Accor as a defendant in the case. Espinosa appealed. Vicarious liability does not apply when an independent contractor relationship exists. The most important test in determining whether or not an independent contractor relationship exists involves the control over the teork. The actual authority of a franchisor is similar to that of an independent contrac- tor. The franchise agreement provides that the safety and security of the motel patrons was Bayou's sole responsibility. Bayou was solely responsible for all employee decisions. Accor did not manage the motel. Conclusively, the evidence demonstrates that Accor did not have the authority to exercise control over the day-to-day operations of the motel. Decision The court of appeals affirmed the trial court's deci- sion that Accor, the franchisor, was not liable for the shooting of Espinosa by a third party at a Motel 6 franchise. Critical Legal Thinking Questions Do you think patrons stay at chain motels because they rely on the safety of these motels? Can you think of something that Accor might have done that Issue Is the franchisor liable for the franchisee's would have prevented it from being removed as a defendant in this case? negligence? "The actual authority of a franchisor is similar to Language of the Court that of an independent contractor." -Love, Judge Facts Accor North America LLC is a franchisor that grants franchises to operate Motel 6 motels. Bayou Hospitality LLC obtained a franchise to operate a Motel 6 in New Orleans, Louisiana. Jorge Espinosa was staying at the Bayou Motel 6 when he was shot by an armed robber in the motel parking lot. The shooting rendered Espinosa a paraplegic. Espinosa sued Bayou, alleging that it was negligent because a portion of the motel's fence around the parking lot was missing, thus enabling the armed robber to enter the premises and shoot him. Espinosa also sued Accor, alleging that Accor, as the franchisor, was vicariously liable for the alleged negligence of the Bayou franchisee. Accor filed a motion for sum- mary judgment contending that it owed no duty to Espinosa because it did not control the day-to- day operations of the Bayou Motel 6 franchise. The court granted Accor's motion for summary judg ment and removed Accor as a defendant in the case. Espinosa appealed. Vicarious liability does not apply when an independent contractor relationship exists. The most important test in determining whether or not an independent contractor relationship exists involves the control over the teork. The actual authority of a franchisor is similar to that of an independent contrac- tor. The franchise agreement provides that the safety and security of the motel patrons was Bayou's sole responsibility. Bayou was solely responsible for all employee decisions. Accor did not manage the motel. Conclusively, the evidence demonstrates that Accor did not have the authority to exercise control over the day-to-day operations of the motel. Decision The court of appeals affirmed the trial court's deci- sion that Accor, the franchisor, was not liable for the shooting of Espinosa by a third party at a Motel 6 franchise. Critical Legal Thinking Questions Do you think patrons stay at chain motels because they rely on the safety of these motels? Can you think of something that Accor might have done that Issue Is the franchisor liable for the franchisee's would have prevented it from being removed as a defendant in this case? negligence? "The actual authority of a franchisor is similar to Language of the Court that of an independent contractor." -Love, Judge Facts Accor North America LLC is a franchisor that grants franchises to operate Motel 6 motels. Bayou Hospitality LLC obtained a franchise to operate a Motel 6 in New Orleans, Louisiana. Jorge Espinosa was staying at the Bayou Motel 6 when he was shot by an armed robber in the motel parking lot. The shooting rendered Espinosa a paraplegic. Espinosa sued Bayou, alleging that it was negligent because a portion of the motel's fence around the parking lot was missing, thus enabling the armed robber to enter the premises and shoot him. Espinosa also sued Accor, alleging that Accor, as the franchisor, was vicariously liable for the alleged negligence of the Bayou franchisee. Accor filed a motion for sum- mary judgment contending that it owed no duty to Espinosa because it did not control the day-to- day operations of the Bayou Motel 6 franchise. The court granted Accor's motion for summary judg ment and removed Accor as a defendant in the case. Espinosa appealed. Vicarious liability does not apply when an independent contractor relationship exists. The most important test in determining whether or not an independent contractor relationship exists involves the control over the teork. The actual authority of a franchisor is similar to that of an independent contrac- tor. The franchise agreement provides that the safety and security of the motel patrons was Bayou's sole responsibility. Bayou was solely responsible for all employee decisions. Accor did not manage the motel. Conclusively, the evidence demonstrates that Accor did not have the authority to exercise control over the day-to-day operations of the motel. Decision The court of appeals affirmed the trial court's deci- sion that Accor, the franchisor, was not liable for the shooting of Espinosa by a third party at a Motel 6 franchise. Critical Legal Thinking Questions Do you think patrons stay at chain motels because they rely on the safety of these motels? Can you think of something that Accor might have done that Issue Is the franchisor liable for the franchisee's would have prevented it from being removed as a defendant in this case? negligence?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Facts Bayou Hospitality LLC obtained a franchise from Accor North America LLC to operate a Motel 6 i... View the full answer