Ackley v. Gulf Oil Corp.

889 F.2d 1280, 1989 WL 143544
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedNovember 27, 1989
DocketNo. 266, Docket 89-7563
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 889 F.2d 1280 (Ackley v. Gulf Oil Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ackley v. Gulf Oil Corp., 889 F.2d 1280, 1989 WL 143544 (2d Cir. 1989).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiffs-appellants, fourteen Connecticut service station operators (hereafter the “Dealers”), appeal from a summary judgment entered in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Burns, Ch.J.) in favor of defendants-appel-lees Gulf Oil Corporation, Chevron U.S.A., Inc., and Cumberland Farms, Inc. In three separate actions, later consolidated, the Dealers alleged claims grounded in violations of the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2801-2841 (1982) (hereafter “PMPA”), and pendent state law claims. They challenge the transfer to Cumberland Farms of their franchise agreements with Chevron, arguing that the [1281]*1281assignment was invalid under the PMPA and under Connecticut law. First, they argue that the assignment effected a termination of the franchises within the meaning of the PMPA, since it substantially altered the franchise relationship and was thus invalid under the Uniform Commercial Code, see Conn.Gen.Stat.Ann. § 42a-2-210 (West 1960). Second, they contend that they are entitled to the right of first refusal to purchase the properties under section 2802(b)(2)(E)(iii) of the PMPA. Third, they assert that defendants’ actions violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Conn.Gen.Stat.Ann. §§ 42-110a to 42-110q (West 1987). Fourth, they argue that their franchises were automatically renewed under Connecticut law, see Connecticut Petroleum Franchise Act, Conn.Gen.Stat.Ann. §§ 42 — 133j to 42-133n (West 1987), and that Cumberland’s imposition of significant rental increases violated the PMPA and state law.

All these arguments were rejected in the comprehensive and well-reasoned opinion of Chief Judge Ellen Bree Burns. See Ackley v. Gulf Oil Corp., 726 F.Supp. 353 (D.Conn.1989). We affirm substantially for the reasons given in that opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Atlantic Autocare, Inc. v. SHELL OIL PRODUCTS CO.
605 F. Supp. 2d 463 (S.D. New York, 2009)
Hartford Electric Supply Co. v. Allen-Bradley Co.
736 A.2d 824 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1999)
Shukla v. BP Exploration & Oil
Eleventh Circuit, 1997
Chaney v. Shell Oil Co.
827 P.2d 196 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1992)
Cedar Brook Service Station, Inc. v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.
746 F. Supp. 278 (E.D. New York, 1990)
John & Kostas Service Station, Inc. v. Cumberland Farms, Inc.
738 F. Supp. 607 (D. Massachusetts, 1990)
Ackley v. Gulf Oil Corporation
889 F.2d 1280 (Second Circuit, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
889 F.2d 1280, 1989 WL 143544, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ackley-v-gulf-oil-corp-ca2-1989.