 |
Wiki Law School will soon be moving! Please update your bookmarks. Our future address is www.wikilawschool.org |
Wrench v. Taco Bell
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
| Wrench v. Taco Bell | |
| Court | Western District of Michigan |
|---|---|
| Citation | 51 F.Supp.2d 840 (1999), 256 F.3d 446 (2001) |
| Date decided | July 6, 2001 |
Facts
- Wrench, LLC = "Wrench" = developer of a character called “Psycho Chihuahua” in 1995
- Taco Bell Corp. = "Taco Bell"
- Agent of Taco Bell inquired about the Chihuahua at a trade show in June 1996
- Negotiations ensued.
- In 1997, Taco Bell went public with a Chihuahua character from another advertising agency
Procedural History
- Wrench sued Taco Bell in the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan
- Wrench claimed that Taco Bell breached an Implied-in-Fact Contract
Issues
Can an implied-in-fact contract be created even if the parties never explicitly state a desire to enter into a contract?
Holding
Yes; the words & actions of parties can create an implied-in-fact contract even if the parties never explicitly state a desire to enter into a contract.
Because of pre-emption by the Copyright Act, this Court grants summary judgment to Taco Bell.Judgment
in favor of Taco Bell
Reasons
Judge Quist: Because Wrench's claim is based on an alleged copyright violation, its claim is pre-empted by the Copyright Act.
Rule
Parties can create a contract without explicitly expressing a desire to do so.
Comments
Resources
