Matarazzo v. Friendly Ice Cream Corp

70 F.R.D. 566 (1976)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Matarazzo (P) claims that Friendly (D) violated federal antitrust laws in its business with P. P filed a class action suit. P alleges that contracts with store managers were not employment contracts but franchise agreements requiring store managers to purchase all of their requirements from D at fixed prices and to charge fixed prices as a condition of the use of D's trademark and trade name. The contracts were thus illegal tying agreements violating the Sherman and Clayton Acts. D contends the agreements were between employer and employee. P motioned for leave to file an amended complaint in order to allege facts with greater specificity and to add a pendant common law claim. The Count I amendment changes the nature of the complaint by changing the name 'franchisees' to 'store managers.' The Count II amendment alleges fraud, breach of contract, economic entrapment, misleading advertisements, false statements, secret rebates and unfair charges and unfair manipulation of net profits. The original complaint was filed 2-14-74. This motion was filed almost two years later.