In William Flynn, et al. v. Anytime Fitness, LLC, et. al., 2022-CA-0742, the Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal held that the Anytime Fitness franchisor was not liable to the plaintiff for severe injuries sustained while using an inversion table at the gym. The plaintiff sustained severe injuries to his neck after the inversion collapsed.
The plaintiffs filed suit against the franchisor, Anytime Fitness, as well as the franchisee, Thornhill Brothers Fitness, LLC, and the franchisee’s insurer, Markel Insurance Company. The claim was founded on general negligence, custodial or premises liability, vicarious liability or respondeat superior, and custodial or premises liability. Plaintiffs appealed the trial court’s decision to grant Anytime Fitness’s request for summary judgment.
The Thornhill gym is a franchise of Anytime Fitness, and Thornhill purchased the inversion table via an internet sales site. However, the purchase and usage of the inversion table violated the franchise agreement of Anytime Fitness, which mandated that all equipment be purchased from a designated source and be brand new. Anytime Fitness maintained that it lacked operational control over the gym’s day-to-day operations, so it could not be held accountable for the plaintiffs’ injuries.
The First Circuit found that franchisor Anytime did not have day-to-day control over Thornhill’s management procedures or activities, did not own the building or land where the Thornhill gym was located or the inversion table, and did not select, approve, maintain, or require Thornhill to purchase the inversion table at issue. Anytime established a franchise structure whereby it grants its franchisees permission to use its trademarks and receives a set royalty fee from Thornhill. Anytime did not purchase or finance any fitness equipment for the Thornhill club, nor did it engage workers, schedule employees, or pay their salaries. Additionally, Anytime did not hire or schedule employees or pay their salaries.
Although the plaintiffs claimed that Anytime exerted some control over their franchisee’s day-to-day operations, the court found the evidence insufficient to establish that Anytime sufficiently exerted custody, control, or “garde” of the inversion table or the Thornhill gym premises. The franchise agreement required Anytime to check the Thornhill facility within 180 days of its opening, however the inversion table was purchased more than three years after the gym’s opening. The court determined that the plaintiffs failed to prove a genuine question of material fact and that summary judgment should be granted in favor of Anytime.
In conclusion, a franchisor will not be held liable for a injuries sustained through the fault of the franchisee, unless the franchisor exerted custody, control, or “garde” over the defective product or premises, or exerted day-to-day control over management procedures or activities.