Lulling v. Barnaby's Family Inns, Inc.

499 F. Supp. 1353, 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14150
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin·Decided October 20, 1980·No. Civ. A. 79-C-308 to 79-C-313·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER

REYNOLDS, Chief Judge.

At the conclusion of a three-week trial and after considering all of the evidence, the briefs, arguments of counsel, the parties’ proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, and the necessity for a speedy decision, the Court announced in its decision from the bench that it was persuaded that judgment should be entered in favor of the defendants on all of the plaintiffs’ claims and on the defendants’ counterclaims. The Court indicated that its decision would be followed by the filing of its findings of fact and conclusions of law, and this is being done now with this document. With the exception of a few modifications, the Court has adopted the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law submitted by the defendants.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The parties to these consolidated actions consist of six groups of plaintiffs and one group of defendants. The six groups of plaintiffs are:

(a) SDL of Waunakee, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation located at 4802 East Washington Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin; and C. D. Lulling and Susan Lulling who are the corporation’s principals and reside at Route 2, Waunakee, Wisconsin.

(b) Kent’s Family Inn, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation located at 7259 North 76th Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Kent Mieding and Susan Mieding who are the corporation’s principals and reside at 552 West Fransee Lane, Glendale, Wisconsin.

(c) Port Washington Road, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation located at 5201 North Port Washington Road, Glendale, Wisconsin; and Thomas G. Meyer and Sue A. Meyer who are the corporation’s principals and reside at 2512 Margaretta Court, Glendale, Wisconsin.

(d) Harry’s of 27th Street, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation located at 4854 South 27th Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Harry C. Nickell and Dianna L. Nickell who are the corporation’s principals and reside at 485 East Oak View Lane, South Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

(e) Chamberlain’s Inn, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation located at 6613 West Mineral Point Road, Madison, Wisconsin; and Michael Jo Chamberlain and Christine M. Chamberlain who are the corporation’s principals and reside at 2702 Badger Lane, Madison, Wisconsin.

(f) Chump on Capitol Drive, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation located at 8501 West Capitol Drive, Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Gene M. McKiernan and Valerie J. McKiernan who are the corporation’s principals and reside at 8873 West Potomac Avenue, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

The following are the defendants:

*1355 (g) Barnaby’s Family Inns, Inc. (“Barnaby’s”), an Illinois corporation headquartered at 2832 West Touhy Avenue, Chicago, Illinois.

(h) Angelo G. Geocaris who is chairman of the board and president of Barnaby’s.

(i) Frank Pope who was executive vice president and chief operating officer of Barnaby’s until May 1978.

(j) Burton E. Evans who was treasurer and chief financial officer of Barnaby’s from June 1972 until March 1978.

(k) Daniel R. Mass who was director of marketing and later a vice president of Barnaby’s from February 1977 through December 1979.

2. Each of the six groups of plaintiffs filed a claim against all of the defendants, and the defendant Barnaby’s filed a counterclaim against each group of plaintiffs.

3. At the conclusion of the plaintiffs’ case in chief, the parties by stipulation dismissed the defendant Daniel R. Mass from the action.

4. During the middle and late 1960’s, Barnaby’s developed the trademarks, service marks, and methods of operation under which the Barnaby’s chain of restaurants have been operated. By 1977, 26 restaurants operating in Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, Indiana, Virginia, and Florida were part of Barnaby’s chain. Of these 26 restaurants, 13 were company owned and 13 were franchises. The 6 Barnaby’s restaurants located in Wisconsin were then company-owned restaurants. This case concerns these 6 Wisconsin restaurants.

5. In December of 1976, Angelo Geocaris and Thomas Meyer visited each of the Barnaby’s Wisconsin restaurants to interview the managers and evaluate their qualifications as'potential franchisees.

6. By early 1977, Barnaby’s decided to sell its company-owned restaurants and convert them to franchise operations. Because it desired to maintain the high standard of quality at the restaurants, Barnaby’s decided it would offer to sell these restaurants to selected employees of the company. For this reason Barnaby’s offered to sell the Wisconsin restaurants to the male plaintiffs, four of whom were managers of the restaurants, one of whom was an assistant manager, and one of whom was the company’s area supervisor for the six Wisconsin restaurants.

7. To determine the sale price for each existing restaurant and franchise, Barnaby’s applied a multiple of slightly more than three to each restaurant’s pre-tax 1976 profits, adjusted to portray pre-tax profits of a franchise operation instead of a company owned operation. For example, in 1976 the company owned restaurant at East Washington Avenue in Madison reported a pre-tax profit of approximately $46,000. To this figure Barnaby’s added back approximately $37,000 in expenses that would not have been incurred by a separately owned franchise operation, and it subtracted approximately $24,000 of expenses that would have been incurred had the restaurant operated as a franchise paying Barnaby’s standard 5% royalty and had it been paying real estate rent equal to 7% of gross sales. With these adjustments Barnaby’s estimated that if this restaurant had been a Barnaby’s franchise in 1976, it would have had a pre-tax profit of approximately $59,-000. To this adjusted pre-tax profit, Barnaby’s applied the multiplier of approximately three, and, accordingly, the selling price for the restaurant and franchise was determined to be $180,000.

8. Using this same method, the selling price for which each Wisconsin restaurant and franchise was set is as follows:

(a) East Washington (SDL of Waunakee, Inc.) -
$180,000
(b) 76th Street (Kent’s Family Inn, Inc.) -
$210,000
(c) Glendale (Port Washington Road, Inc.) -
$195,000
(d) 27th Street (Harry’s of 27th Street, Inc.) -
$300,000
(e) Mineral Point (Chamberlain’s Inn, Inc.) -
$110,000
(f) Capitol Drive (Chump on Capitol Drive, Inc.) -
$90,000

9. Since the employee-purchasers did not have the financial resources to pay the total purchase price outright, Barnaby’s structured the transactions so that the purchase price would be paid over a five to ten-year time period. Moreover, Barnaby’s *1356 arranged a $10,000 loan from a Chicago bank for each employee-purchaser, the loan to be used for working capital.

10.

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

Lulling v. Barnaby's Family Inns, Inc., 499 F. Supp. 1353, 1980 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14150 (E.D. Wis. 1980).

499 F. Supp. 1353 (Lulling v. Barnaby's Family Inns, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related