Over a Thousand Franchisees Demand to See Televised UPS Store Trial

Posted Fri, 2009/04/10 - 17:31 by Don Sniegowski

LOS ANGELES – Against opposition by United Parcel Service, Inc., some 1,400 franchise owners have requested that the Los Angeles Superior Court allow them to see on closed circuit television a lawsuit of The UPS Store and Mail Boxes Etc. franchisees going up against their franchisor.

The letter from law firm Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold LLP, addressed to Judge William Highberger, states why it is important to broadcast the Morgate LLC v Mail Boxes Etc., Inc. class action trial that begins April 15. It declares, “An entire franchise system made up of thousands of stores nationwide no longer exists and many of the individuals involved are now alleging they were fraudulently induced into a deal that dismantled one of the largest and longest standing franchisor-supported systems in our country.”

The end of the letter has a list of some 1,400 respondents throughout the United States who are interested in watching the proceedings.

The letter also goes on to stipulate that California and U.S. law allows televised hearings for interested persons. It describes the closed circuit provider, Courtroom View Network, as having had its phones “ringing off the hook from those asking to have the chance to watch this trial.”

Average:

Your rating: None

Franchise topic:
- legal

Email this Story

29 Comments

MBE Morgate Trial Continued by Janet Sparks

Submitted by Janet Sparks on Wed, 2009/04/15 - 17:57.

Yesterday, according to sources, Judge Highberger ruled that the trial in the Morgate LLC v. Mail Boxes Etc. case would be continued. A hearing is now scheduled for next Thursday, April 23.

Janet Sparks is the former publisher of the Continental Franchise Review, an industry newsletter that covered the franchise industry. She is now a freelance investigative reporter for franchising and a columnist for a leading franchise pu

Morgate LLC Vs. MBE by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Sun, 2009/05/31 - 08:06.

Now listed as no future hearings... Did they settle the case?

Morgate LLC Vs. MBE/UPS by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Mon, 2009/06/01 - 09:46.

It must have settled.

Morgate LLC by Guest 101

Submitted by Guest 101 on Tue, 2009/06/02 - 17:27.

The case is not settled or thrown out. There appears to be quite a few "future hearings" listed on the CA Courts website.

It ain't over until the fat lady sings! by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Tue, 2009/06/02 - 21:49.

And Jane Barrett ain't even tuning up yet!

Morgate LLC Vs. MBE by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Sun, 2009/05/31 - 22:10.

Might have been thrown out of court like the BSA case.

Morgate LLC Vs. MBE by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Sun, 2009/05/31 - 14:33.

???

MBE Morgate Trial Continued by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Wed, 2009/04/15 - 19:21.

Smells like UPS is about to get their way.

Televised Coverage of UPS Store Trial Turned Down by Don Sniegowski

Submitted by Don Sniegowski on Wed, 2009/04/15 - 12:41.

The Courtroom View Network (CVN), the provider of on-demand video for civil litigation, has been turned down in its efforts to televise the Morgate v. Mailboxes Etc. (UPS Store) proceedings.

Below is their email that was sent out a couple of hours ago to now more than two thousand individuals that applied to watch the trial.

As you may know, Judge Highberger denied CVN's initial request to capture and stream video for the case of Morgate v. UPS. CVN subsequently received over 2,000 requests that it cover the case. As a result, CVN renewed its request to the court.
In its second application, CVN shared with the court the substantial public interest in the case, especially among the franchisee class members. CVN offered to make the case availalable at steeply discounted rates, or even to limit access to just the class members to eliminate any risk of public spectacle or jury tainting. CVN also suggested that allowing coverage might reduce the risk of crowding in the courtroom from the many interested parties who wished the see the proceedings and would have no choice other than to attend in person.
On Monday April 13 UPS filed a brief in opposition to CVN's renewed request, and Tuesday April 14 Judge Highberger again refused to allow coverage.
Thank you for contacting us. Should Judge Highberger change his mind for any reason, CVN is prepared to capture and stream the proceedings.
The Courtroom View Network

Re: Televised Coverage of UPS Store Trial Turned Down by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Wed, 2009/04/15 - 14:54.

Thanks to all of the zee who helped try to get this covered. It was greatly appreciated by the MBE center store owners in this battle.

That is dissappointing no television coverage by Barbara Jorgensen

Submitted by Barbara Jorgensen on Wed, 2009/04/15 - 13:25.

Many people will be upset. It would of been an education for many.

Good Luck UPS!

Come on Do by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Wed, 2009/04/15 - 13:40.

Now why would you wish UPS luck? They can usually buy their own luck.

Wish MBE Franchisees Well by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Wed, 2009/04/15 - 14:23.

Yes, indeed. Why wish UPS luck? They've lots of money. Instead, let's wish the small guys - the MBE / UPS Store franchisees luck.

If you think this way than there is no hope by Barbara Jorgensen

Submitted by Barbara Jorgensen on Wed, 2009/04/15 - 14:17.

Zee's do win in court. You have read about Rich from Quiznos that won. I have conversed with several franchise attorneys that have said zees win in court.

There is no records of how many zees win in arbitration. I have to believe there are good arbitrators that base their decision on justice.

I sincerely hope justice will prevail with the UPS people. I hope the franchise industry will flourish with the zees and zors winning and not only the zors.

If fraud can be proven it is against the law. I have read the FTC laws for franchising and there is alot of laws that comply with the state laws about disclosure. (15 states have excellent laws to protect franchisees.) The fact fraud is a big issue in many sectors of business is proof that this is happening. Look at the banks, real estate and other sectors of business. Why would franchising be any different?

Comments Moved by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Wed, 2009/04/15 - 14:35.

This comment thread has been moved here.

Re: Over a Thousand Franchisees Demand to See Televised UPS Stor by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Sat, 2009/04/11 - 11:50.

It's quite unfortunate, but I believe even if this is televised on Courtroom View Network, it's going to be quite expensive for the franchisees to pay for the Pay for View. One step at a time though....

Re: Re: Over a Thousand Franchisees Demand to See Televised UPS by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Sat, 2009/04/11 - 12:46.

Not really... You can't put a price on being able to gather that much information for the lawsuits that will follow this trial.

Re: Re: Re: Over a Thousand Franchisees Demand to See Televised by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Sat, 2009/04/11 - 12:56.

Unless UPS wins this case this franchise is done. If they lose all the pre 2003 stores will have all the ammunition they need to get out of their agreements. And that in itself will give the post 2003 stores reason to litigate. UPS will divest MBE before the end of the year effectively ending this franchise.

UPS lawsuit to be Televised by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Sat, 2009/04/11 - 10:09.

Televise it - Let the world know - 'What Brown can do to you'. Sad state of affair - these corporations destroys small businesses and one day when they go-under with a begging bowl go to the tax payers for ' Bailout' This dirty brown did the same - took over a profitable franchise for peanuts and with their greed made hundreds perhaps thousands of store owners go out or business and one day may ask for a bailout. Ash

IF IT'S TELEVISED...... by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Sat, 2009/04/11 - 11:28.

THEN UPS WILL SETTLE...UPS CAN NEVER LET THE TRUTH GET OUT TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC...TELEVISED=SETTLEMENT

Public Trials--Freedom of Information-UPS Trial by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Sat, 2009/04/11 - 11:22.

What good news that this trial may actually be televised and the PROMISE of courts open to view of the public will be kept in the City of Angels. Open courts are vital to our democracy. Hopefully, even the federal courts will soon allow civil trials to be televised as the public demands open court rooms as a means of understanding the dire situation our country is in today and how the rule of law has failed the people. That is, the people suffer when the rule of law doesn't restrain greed and exploitation of innocents. So often in commercial disputes, there are settlements and most of the discovery items on both sides are not open to public view because they are sealed in the courts by agreement. But the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution provided jury trials for commercial disputes because our forefathers undestood that the big will eat the little, especially when they can do it out of view of the public and the purview of common law and a jury. Good luck to these plaintiffs who have fought six long years against the great power and finances of this giant of the shipping industry, UPS, and their own special franchisor, MBE, whose profits have been enhanced as franchisees, current and past, have struggled to survive after their great losses. "Waiting for the fat lady" to start singing next Wednesday!

The City of Angels? by Les Stewart

Submitted by Les Stewart on Sat, 2009/04/11 - 09:09.

Don, Great article. It's over. Les Stewart MBA FranchiseFool :: WikidFranchise.org

Les Stewart MBA FranchiseFool :: WikidFranchise.org

It's not a class action. by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Sat, 2009/04/11 - 08:11.

Note to Don Sniegowski, article author: This is NOT a class action. The franchisees have shouldered the financial burden of paying their legals for over six years.

Not a Class Action by Don Sniegowski

Submitted by Don Sniegowski on Sat, 2009/04/11 - 12:38.

Thank you. I've confirmed that it is not a class action and made the correction.

Not A Class Action ---Mass Action in Federal Court is BSA by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Sat, 2009/04/11 - 13:24.

Yes, Don! This is not the BSA action, started in 2006, involving over 200 plaintiffs that started out as a Class Action in the State Courts and that was then removed to the Federal Court in California upon the request of the defendant, MBE-UPS! Class Action cases involving diversity and a certain amount of money apparently are now removed to the Federal Courts under the Class Action Fairness Act. Presently, the judge in the Federal Court, where the Class Action became a Mass Action, with the agreement of the parties and the Court, has dismissed the BSA case in complete favor of the defendant, MBE-UPS, in a summary judgement against eight bellwether plaintiffs. Apparently, the eight bellwether plaintiffs that the court and the parties AGREED would be representative of the issues of fact to be tried in a JURY trial, are dismissed in a summary judgement but the remaining 200 or more plaintiffs cannot be dismissed out of court unless the judge issues a summary judgment against each and every one of the plaintiffs in the mass action. The federal judge chose this very expensive action, urged by MBE-UPS, for the over 200 franchisee plaintiffs, which is now in process, INSTEAD of permitting the plaintiff bellwether summary judgment ONLY to go forward immediately to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for their review of the summary judgement and their findings, as was urged by the attorneys for the 200 or more franchisees. The ability of the exploitive franchisors and multi-billion dollar corporations to use law and process to DELAY and cause GREAT EXPENSE to plaintiff franchisees who have to band together to even be able to afford to fight the big entity in the courts is evidence that the "deck is stacked" in the courts against the small percentage of franchisees who survive to get to the courts to have their cases heard.

TELL THE WORLD by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Fri, 2009/04/10 - 23:58.

we need your help, everyone request the trial be televised!

I would love to see this on television also by Barbara Jorgensen

Submitted by Barbara Jorgensen on Fri, 2009/04/10 - 18:18.

I hope more zee's even from other franchises call and request to see this on television. It would be an education for many zees who have no idea what happens in court.

Good luck to all the UPS zees.

If anyone wants to see the trial by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Fri, 2009/04/10 - 18:22.

Here is the link.

The form you will be asked to complete requires the following information:

Case name: Answer: Morgate LLC, et al. vs. Mail Boxes Etc., et al.

Case Number: Answer: BC294647

Jurisdiction: Los Angeles, CA

City and State: Los Angeles, CA

Judge: Answer: William F. Highberger

MESSAGE FROM COURTROOM VIEW NETWORK by Guest

Submitted by Guest on Wed, 2009/04/15 - 14:50.

Thank you for contacting Courtroom View Network suggesting that CVN cover the Morgate v. Mailboxes Etc. (UPS) proceedings before Judge Highberger in Los Angeles Superior Court. Courtroom View Network is the legal industry's first and only provider to deliver live and on-demand video of high-stakes civil litigation. CVN serves members of the legal, financial, and business community who need instantaneous, comprehensive coverage of litigation for the purposes of decision-making, research, evaluation, and education. CVN has covered hundreds of legal proceedings throughout the country and has archived over 5000 hours of searchable content. As you may know, Judge Highberger denied CVN's initial request to capture and stream video for the case of Morgate v. UPS. CVN subsequently received over 2,000 requests that it cover the case. As a result, CVN renewed its request to the court. In its second application, CVN shared with the court the substantial public interest in the case, especially among the franchisee class members. CVN offered to make the case availalable at steeply discounted rates, or even to limit access to just the class members to eliminate any risk of public spectacle or jury tainting. CVN also suggested that allowing coverage might reduce the risk of crowding in the courtroom from the many interested parties who wished the see the proceedings and would have no choice other than to attend in person. On Monday April 13 UPS filed a brief in opposition to CVN's renewed request, and Tuesday April 14 Judge Highberger again refused to allow coverage. Thank you for contacting us. Should Judge Highberger change his mind for any reason, CVN is prepared to capture and stream the proceedings. The Courtroom View Network Gretchen Edge-Correa Trial Coordinator Courtroom View Network 75 Maiden Lane, Suite 804 New York, NY 10032 347-649-9112/877-834-8627 ex. 221 www.courtroomview.com

Over a Thousand Franchisees Demand to See Televised UPS Store Trial

29 Comments

Comment viewing options

Post new comment

Search by company