Facts

Two former Pepperidge Farm distributors filed suit against Pepperidge Farm under Washington's Franchise Investment Protection Act (FIPA).

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs contended that Pepperidge Farm was an unregistered franchisor under FIPA. In connection with their FIPA claims, the plaintiffs sought actual and exemplary damages and attorney's fees.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant argued that the distributorships were not franchises because they did not operate under a marketing plan, their distributorships were not substantially related to Defendant's name or trademarks, and the plaintiffs had not paid franchise fees.

Result

The Court found the plaintiffs' distributorships were not franchises because the plaintiffs did not operate under a marketing plan, their distributorships were not substantially associated with Pepperidge Farm's name or trademark, and the plaintiffs paid no franchise fee. The Court dismissed the plaintiffs' FIPA claims with prejudice and ordered Pepperidge Farm to file a motion to recover its attorney's fees and costs under FIPA.