The Franchise Owner's most trusted news source


Log In / Register | Dec 15, 2017

Comments regarding this article:

Add new comment


3 Comments

Is there a return on investment for small firm SLAPP litigators?

The Golob case is being litigated by what appears to be an individual Personal Injury attorney. No offense to Mr. Reed, but those are hardly impressive credentials. It appears that Golob cannot afford the expense of SLAPP litigation, but would like to enjoy the benefits.

After decades of defending franchisees, Robert Zarco was lured to the dark side by big money from Kahala. His reputation has suffered ever since. His career may never completely recover for having switched sides.

Traditionally, SLAPP litigation has been primarily litigated by large firms. That makes it expensive. While Kahala paid a lot of cash to Zarco, it is not nearly what they would have paid to a large firm. So as franchisors look to cheapen the process while still reaping the benefits, you have to wonder if it’s worth it for small firms to take on these cases. I’m guessing Zarco would say no. We’ll see how Reed fares.

One possibility

Probably working on a anti-SLAPP lawsuit and don't want to disclose too much in advance.

Why did unhappyfranchisee.com

Why did unhappyfranchisee.com remove this from their website?