Business Law Franchise Opinions

State of California Department of Corporations Brian R. Van Camp, Commissioner In reply refer to: File No. _____ This letter is not an Interpretive Opinion for the reasons stated below. Mr. Marsh V. Racine, PresidentDimensional Housing Division3270 Cherry AvenueLong Beach, CA 90807 Dear Mr. Racine: The request for an interpretive opinion, contained in your letter dated September 27, 1973, has been considered by the Commissioner. Your letter raises questions regarding the so-called “Associate Distributorship Agreement” (“agreement”) between Racine Homes, Inc., a… Read more

State of California Department of Corporations Brian R. Van Camp, Commissioner In reply refer to: File No. _____ This letter is not an Interpretive Opinion for the reasons stated below. Mr. Joseph L. StrabalaAttorney at LawFryer, Tjensvold, Phillips &Lempio250 Sansome StreetSuite 1310San Francisco, CA 94111 Dear Mr. Strabala: The request for an interpretive opinion, contained in your letter dated October 9, 1973, as supplemented by the material received in this office on December 20, 1973, has been considered by the Commissioner.… Read more

State of California Department of Corporations Brian R. Van Camp, Commissioner In reply refer to: File No. _____ This letter is not an Interpretive Opinion for the reasons stated below. Mr. James F. McGrillPresidentNational Glass Service Inc.385 Arnold StreetWoonsocket, RI 02895 Dear Mr. McGill: The request for an interpretive opinion contained in your letter dated September 20, 1973, has been considered by the Commissioner. Your letter raises the question whether the agreements between national glass Services, Inc. (“National”) and persons referred… Read more

State of California Department of Corporations Brian R. Van Camp, Commissioner In reply refer to: File No. _____ This letter is not an Interpretive Opinion for the reasons stated below. Mr. J. R. RuckerNewFangled Piping HotSandwich Machine Co.3030 – 20th StreetSan Francisco, CA Dear Mr. Rucker: The request for an interpretive opinion, contained in your letter received by us on August 20, 1973, has, been considered by the Commissioner. Your letter raises the question whether the Independent Wholesale Distributor of Agreements… Read more

State of California Department of Corporations Brian R. Van Camp, Commissioner In reply refer to: File No. _____ This letter is not an Interpretive Opinion for the reasons stated below. Mr. Colin C. KelleyAttorney at Law66 Jackson London SquareOakland, CA 94607 Dear Mr. Kelley: The request for an interpretive opinion, contained in your letter dated October 19, 1973, has been considered by the Commissioner. Your letter raises the question whether the agreement entered into on May 9, 1973, between Stork Bonds… Read more

State of California Department of Corporations Brian R. Van Camp, Commissioner In reply refer to: File No. _____ This letter is not an Interpretive Opinion for the reasons stated below. Mr. Peter J. Palms IVPresidentComputerized Real Indoor GolfCorporation200 Huntington Ave., Suite 1607Alexandria, VA 22303 Dear Mr. Palms: The request for an interpretive opinion, contained in your letter dated July 30, 1973, as supplemented by your letter dated August 22, 1973, requesting reconsideration of the views expressed in Commissioner’s Opinion No. 73/29F,… Read more

State of California Department of Corporations Brian R. Van Camp, Commissioner In reply refer to: File No. _____ This letter is not an Interpretive Opinion for the reasons stated below. Mr. Arnold J. StoneAttorney at LawWainer & Stone, Inc.1900 Avenue of the StarsSuite 1090Century CityLos Angeles, CA 90067 Dear Mr. Stone: The request for an interpretive opinion, contained in your letter dated July 24, 1973, has been considered by the Commissioner. Your letter raises the question whether the so-called “license agreement”… Read more

State of California Department of Corporations Brian R. Van Camp, Commissioner In reply refer to: File No. _____ This letter is not an Interpretive Opinion for the reasons stated below. Mr. Robert A. GambleAttorney at LawGamble, Riepe, Webster & Fletcher500 Bankers Trust BuildingDes Moines, IA 50309 Dear Mr. Gamble: The request for an interpretive opinion contained in your letter dated August 10, 1973, has been considered by the Commissioner. Your letter raises the question whether the Dealership Agreements (“Agreements”} between Windtie… Read more

State of California Department of Corporations Brian R. Van Camp, Commissioner In reply refer to: File No. _____ This letter is not an Interpretive Opinion for the reasons stated below. Mr. Michael J. HarbersAttorney at LawO’Melveny & Myers611 West Sixth StreetLos Angeles, CA 90017 Dear Mr. Harbers: The request for an interpretive opinion, contained in your letter dated April 16, 1973, has been considered by the Commissioner. Your letter raises the question whether the arrangements between Ovation Cosmetics, Inc., a California… Read more

State of California Department of Corporations Brian R. Van Camp, Commissioner In reply refer to: File No. _____ This letter is not an Interpretive Opinion for the reasons stated below. Mr. Donald F. KrankAttorney at LawKrank and Notturno1101 Park City CenterLancaster, PA 17601 Dear Mr. Krank: The request for an interpretive opinion, contained in your letter dated July 30, 1973, has been considered by the Commissioner. Your letter raises the question whether the agreements between Protection Plus International, Limited, a Pennsylvania… Read more