Go to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.comGo to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.com
VitalLaw®
  • Find answers to your questions
  • Log in to access your subscriptions
In depth. On point.
In depth. On point.
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
In depth. On point.
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations
    • TOP STORY—D. Minn.: Boycott claims adequately alleged against real estate brokerage firm, parent company
    • ANTITRUST NEWS: Former real estate investor indicted in probe of Alabama foreclosure auctions
    • ANTITRUST NEWS: State transportation authority alleges LIBOR manipulation
    • ANTITRUST—S.D. Fla.: Operator of duty free shops fails to state antitrust and Lanham Act claims against cosmetics firm
    • ANTITRUST—S.D. Tex.: LexisNexis could not be held liable for code violations by Texas courts
    • FRANCHISING & DISTRIBUTION NEWS: Curves charged with failing to inform prospective franchisee about planned sale of franchise system
    • FRANCHISING & DISTRIBUTION NEWS: Supreme Court declines to review Ford’s refusal to supply heavy trucks and parts to dealers
    • INDUSTRY NEWS: New Competition and Markets Authority now U.K.’s primary competition and consumer agency
    • STATE UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES—N.D. Cal.: LinkedIn may be liable for misrepresenting security protocols
    • STATE UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES—W.D. Mo.: Missouri Merchandising Practices Act claim against gasoline station operators preempted by Petroleum Marketing Practices Act
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations

    Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, FRANCHISING & DISTRIBUTION NEWS: Supreme Court declines to review Ford’s refusal to supply heavy trucks and parts to dealers, (Apr 1, 2014)

    Law Firms Mentioned:Bressler, Amery & Ross, P.C. | Goldstein & Russell, P.C. | Kramon & Graham, P.A.
    Organizations Mentioned:Bayshore Truck Sales, Inc. | Bressler Amery & Ross | Ford Motor Company | Goldstein & Russell, PC | Kramon & Graham, PA

    By Linda O’Brien, J.D., LL.M.

    The U.S. Supreme Court will not review a Third Circuit decision that overturned a breach of contract ruling against Ford Motor Company for ceasing its supply of trucks and parts to its truck dealers. The appellate court ruled that the dealership agre ...

    By Linda O’Brien, J.D., LL.M.

    The U.S. Supreme Court will not review a Third Circuit decision that overturned a breach of contract ruling against Ford Motor Company for ceasing its supply of trucks and parts to its truck dealers. The appellate court ruled that the dealership agreements were not breached since Ford continued to supply the dealers with truck parts. The Court denied the dealers’ petition for certiorari on March 31. The petition was docketed on January 22, 2014 (Bayshore Ford Truck Sales, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., Dkt. 13-886).

    The dispute arose after Ford sold its heavy truck manufacturing and parts business in 1997 to competitor Freightliner for $300 million. Pursuant to this agreement, Ford stopped accepting orders from its dealers for heavy duty trucks and parts. As a consequence of this sale, the complaining dealers lost tens of millions of dollars in sales, the dealers claimed. The dealers brought a breach of contract suit against Ford in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of a class of Ford heavy truck dealers. The federal district court granted the dealers summary judgment on the breach of contract claim, and a jury returned individual verdicts for the eleven dealers.

    On appeal, the Third Circuit reversed the district court on the ground of factual mistake. Subsequently, the appeals court denied the dealers’ petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc. The federal district court concluded that it was required to apply the Third Circuit ruling

    In the petition, the dealers questioned whether, in this case which involved significant harm to a substantial group of parties, the court of appeals’ sua sponte invention of an indisputably false fact that was the sole premise of its ruling departed from the ordinary and usual course of proceedings so that the judgment should be summarily reversed.

    Attorneys: Eric L. Chase and Genevieve K. LaRobardier (Bressler, Amery & Ross, P.C.); Thomas C. Goldstein and Kevin K Russell (Goldstein & Russell, P.C.); James P. Ulwick, Jean E. Lewis, and Steven M. Klepper (Kramon & Graham, P.A.) for Bayshore Ford Truck Sales, Inc.

    Companies: Bayshore Truck Sales, Inc.; Ford Motor Company

    News: FranchisingDistribution

    © 2026 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use