Logourl black
From our private database of 13,300+ case briefs...

Grunin v. International House of Pancakes

United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
513 F.2d 114 (1975)


Facts

Current and former International House of Pancakes franchisees (plaintiffs) filed a class action lawsuit for antitrust violations against the IHOP division of International Industries, Inc. (defendant). The class was created when nine lawsuits were consolidated in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. IHOP was accused of tethering the lease and purchase of equipment, supplies, and services at greater than fair value to the franchise agreement in violation of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 and 2, and the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 14. The plaintiffs requested damages, injunctions, and fees. A settlement of $4,025,000 less attorneys’ fees was proposed, and class members were notified. Several plaintiffs objected to the proposal. The judge rejected the settlement because it failed to address the allegedly illegal leases, but noted that a large financial payout might bankrupt IHOP. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit upheld the rejection. A new settlement (1) substantially amending the lease terms for services, equipment, and supplies, (2) creating a $500,000 fund for former franchisees, and (3) awarding $1,250,000 in attorneys’ fees was accepted as “fair, reasonable, and adequate as to said class and sub-class plaintiffs.” The plaintiffs generally approved of the new settlement, but Grunin (plaintiff) appealed the notice and content to the court of appeals.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Stephenson, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 147,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,300 briefs, keyed to 182 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.