Fresher v. Shell Oil Co.

Decision Date05 May 1988
Docket NumberNo. 87-3781,87-3781
Citation846 F.2d 45
PartiesCecil FRESHER; Gerald Cochran; Don Sorenson; Bob Jones; Leland Wienke; Monte Cooper; Jerry Illingworth; Bruce Chapman; Tom Doll; George Schreiner; Robert Peck; Denny Bird; Eddie Attrash; Mark Saxe; Fresne's Auto Service, Inc.; and Dwight Estby, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. SHELL OIL COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, Defendant-Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

Mark A. LaMantia, Evanston, Ill., John S. Butterfield, Shannon and Johnson, Portland, Or., for plaintiffs-appellants.

George A. Nachtigall, Shell Oil Co., Houston, Tex., for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon.

Before GOODWIN, NELSON and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellants are retail dealers of motor fuels in Portland, Oregon. Each entered into a Dealer Agreement and Motor Fuel Station Lease with appellee, Shell Oil Company (Shell). Under the agreements the dealers have the right to purchase and resell motor fuels under the Shell trademark at station locations owned by Shell.

The dealers brought this action in U.S. District Court alleging that Shell had agreed to assign their lease and supply agreements to Pacific Northern Oil Corporation (Pacific). They further alleged that such assignments would result in termination of their franchises and deny them the protections granted by the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act (PMPA). 15 U.S.C. Secs. 2801-2806 (1982). The dealers requested injunctive relief and damages.

Pacific and Shell moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The district court (U.S. Magistrate) granted the motions on the ground that the proposed assignments did not constitute a termination under the PMPA. The dealers timely appeal the dismissal of their action against Shell pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(c)(3). We affirm.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

Dismissal for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) is reviewed de novo. Fort Vancouver Plywood Co. v. United States, 747 F.2d 547, 552 (9th Cir.1984). Review is limited to the contents of the complaint. Id. A complaint should not be dismissed under the rule "unless it appears beyond doubt that plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief." Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 101-102, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957). All allegations of material fact are taken as true and construed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Western Reserve Oil & Gas Co. v. New, 765 F.2d 1428, 1430 (9th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1056, 106 S.Ct. 795, 88 L.Ed.2d 773 (1986) (citations omitted).

DISCUSSION

Congress enacted Title I of the PMPA to establish "minimum Federal standards governing the termination and nonrenewal of franchise relationships for the sale of motor fuel by the franchisor or supplier." S.Rep. No. 731, 95th Cong., 2d Sess. 15 (1978), reprinted in 1978 U.S.Code Cong. & Ad.News 873. Title I protects franchisees from arbitrary or discriminatory termination of their franchises. Id., 1978 U.S.Code Cong. & Ad.News at 874. It prohibits a franchisor from terminating a franchise unless the termination is based upon a ground specified in the statute and executed in accordance with the statute's notice requirements. Id., 1978 U.S.Code Cong. & Ad.News at 874.

A franchise is defined in terms of three elements: a contract to use the refiner's trademark, a contract for supply of motor fuel to be sold under the trademark, and a lease of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
32 cases
  • In re County of Orange, Bankruptcy No. SA 96-22272 JR
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Central District of California
    • 5 Diciembre 1996
    ... ... Clegg v. Cult Awareness Network, 18 F.3d 752, 754 (9th Cir.1994); Fresher v. Shell Oil Co., 846 F.2d 45, 46 (9th Cir.1988); Western Reserve Oil and Gas Co. v. New, 765 F.2d 1428, 1430 (9th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 ... ...
  • Meghani v. Shell Oil Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
    • 29 Agosto 2000
    ... ... Page 752 ... May-Som, 869 F.2d at 921. All the courts and cases cited by Plaintiffs subscribe to this same view. See Chestnut Hill Gulf, 940 F.2d at 751 (citing Fresher v. Shell Oil Co., 846 F.2d 45, 46-47 (9th Cir.1988); Cedar Brook Serv. Station, Inc. v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 746 F.Supp. 278 (E.D.N.Y.1990); Florham Park Chevron, Inc. v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., No. 86-4748, 1990 WL 61787, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5685 (D.N.J. May 9, 1990); Ackley v. Gulf Oil ... ...
  • Ackley v. Gulf Oil Corp., Civ. No. B-86-402 (EBB)
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Connecticut
    • 5 Mayo 1989
    ...and (3) the right to be supplied with that fuel. Barnes v. Gulf Oil Corp., 795 F.2d 358, 360 (4th Cir.1986); Fresher v. Shell Oil Co., 846 F.2d 45, 46-47 (9th Cir.1988). As stated by the Barnes court, the Act defines a franchise in terms "a contract to use the refiner's trademark, a contrac......
  • In re County of Orange
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Central District of California
    • 24 Enero 1996
    ... ... Fresher v. Shell Oil Co., 846 F.2d 45, 46 (9th Cir.1988); Western Reserve Oil and Gas Co. v. New, 765 F.2d 1428, 1430 (9th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT