Wilkerson v. McDonald's Corporation et al
Filing
41
Judge George A. OToole, Jr: OPINION AND ORDER entered denying without prejudice 16 Motion for Summary Judgment (Lyness, Paul)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 12-10775-GAO
YOLANDA WILKERSON, Individually and on Behalf of Minors, SW, DW, NW, JA and JA
Plaintiffs,
v.
MCDONALD’S CORPORATION and HOGANS OF NEWBURYPORT
Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
July 29, 2013
O’TOOLE, D.J.
This case arises out of an unfortunate incident between the plaintiffs and employees of a
McDonald’s restaurant in Braintree, Massachusetts. Defendant, Hogans of Newburyport is the
owner of the McDonald’s franchise at issue, and defendant, McDonald’s Corporation is the
franchisor. McDonald’s Corporation has moved (dkt. no. 16) for summary judgment.
McDonald’s chief argument is that it cannot be held vicariously liable for the actions of
its franchisee’s employees because an agency relationship did not exist. Whether an agency
relationship existed is a factual determination based on the level of control exerted by the
franchisor, and courts have come to different conclusions as to McDonald’s in particular.
Compare McLaughlin v. McDonald’s Corp, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23222 at *27-28 (D. Mass.
Nov. 29, 2001) (granting summary judgment based on lack of control by McDonald’s) with
Butler v. McDonald’s Corp., 110 F. Supp. 2d 62, 68 (D.R.I. 2000) (denying summary judgment
because reasonable jury could find agency relationship existed). The findings in McLaughlin and
Butler, and other cases dealing with this issue depend upon the actual control exercised or not by
the franchisor. The only evidence currently before the court is the franchise agreement, in which
McDonald’s disclaims any agency relationship. The plaintiffs argue, and I agree, that more
discovery is necessary before summary judgment can be properly decided.
Therefore, McDonald’s Motion (dkt. no. 16) For Summary Judgment is DENIED without
prejudice.
It is SO ORDERED.
/s/ George A. O’Toole, Jr.
United States District Judge
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?