Kubota Tractor Corp. makes farm, industrial, and outdoor equipment. Its franchise contracts allow Kubota to enter into dealership agreements with “others at any location.” Kejzar Motors, Inc., is a Kubota dealer in Nacogdoches, Texas and Jasper, Texas. These two Kejzar stores operate as one dealership with two locations. Kubota granted a dealership to Michael Hammer in Lufkin, Texas, which lies between Kejzar’s two store locations. Kejzar filed a suit in a Texas state court against Kubota. Kejzar asked for an injunction to prevent Kubota from locating a dealership in the same market area. Kejzar argued that the new location would cause it to suffer a significant loss of profits. [Kejzar Motors, Inc. v. Kubota Tractor Corp., 334 S.W.3d 351 (Tex.App.—Tyler 2011)]
Which party in a franchise relationship typically determines the territory served by a franchisee?
Which legal principles come into play in this area?
How do these concepts most likely apply in this case?
