An Ohio judge ruled for distributors and against Pabst in its effort to terminate distributors. Pabst Brewing Co. stock was sold to Pabst Holding Co and Pabst Holding claimed to be a successor manufacturer. They terminated existing distributors under OH Franchise Act and the distributors brought this matter to court. The court stated that interpretation of Franchise Act unnecessary because the legal issue turns on the provisions of the distributor agreements. The distributor agreements in question require sixty day notice before termination. Pabst did not provide notice within sixty days. As such the court held that Pabst breached the distributor agreements by failing to give sixty day notice prior to termination. Pabst’s attempted termination was ineffective and the distributor agreements continue to bind Pabst.
This judge also has other supplier termination cases before him. His opinion in the Pabst case can be found here.
Thanks to Dave Raber for the heads up.