Motiva Enterpirses LLC v. W.F. Shuck Petroleum, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30773 (D. Conn. 2-22-12)

Summary judgment granted dismissing franchisee's PMPA claims of constructive termination and lack of proper notice.

Without deciding whether a claim for constructive termination can be raised outside the context of a franchise assignment, the court held that the franchisee had presented no evidence upon which a reasonable jury could decide that Motiva had breached the franchise agreement or forced the franchisee to abandon the franchise.

With respect to the franchisee's claim that Motiva had not provided proper notice of termination, the court held that the franchisee had presented no evidence upon which a reasonable jury could decide that Motiva terminated the franchise prior to the time the franchisee elected to debrand its stations and stop buying branded gasoline from Motiva. Accordingly, the PMPA notice provisions were inapplicable to this case.