Posted on 04/21/2008 12:14:51 PM PDT by LSUfan
A Baltimore couple has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the Islamic investment bank that owns the Church's Chicken fast-food chain, alleging their franchise failed because the bank's strict adherence to the religious code of Shari'ah prohibited the couple from selling pork.
Marcus and Denise Beasley, who are black, claimed they were treated differently by the bank, now known as Atlanta-based Arcapita Inc., than non-black franchisees who were allowed to continue serving breakfast dishes containing pork after the chain was acquired by the bank in December 2004.
The couple did not benefit from the grandfather policy allowing the sale of pork even though their contract with the chain's former owners, AFC Enterprises Inc., to open a location in Baltimore/ Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport's new terminal predated the takeover and policy change, according to the suit filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Baltimore.
In the lawsuit, which seeks $5 million in actual damages, $5 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in punitive damages, the Beasleys contend the bank's "stated reason" for disallowing the sale of pork in their case -- they had not yet opened for business - - was "pretextual."
"Arcapita permitted all of the other breakfast franchisees, which were approximately 30 Church's Chicken restaurants, to do so, all of which were owned by persons who are non-African American or Caucasian," the complaint states. "Of the Church's Chicken breakfast franchises that existed when Arcapita acquired the chain, plaintiffs are the only ones who are African American."
Calls to Arcapita were not returned Wednesday.
Shari'ah law
The Beasleys began negotiations with Atlanta-based AFC in May 2004 and inked a franchise agreement Dec. 17, 2004.
Church's Chicken, which serves American Southern comfort food, was founded in San Antonio in 1952 and has approximately 1,500 franchises worldwide, some of which trade as Texas Chicken, according to the company's Web site.
On Dec. 26, Crescent Capital Investments Inc., the U.S. affiliate of Bahrain-based First Islamic Investment Bank BSC, bought Church's, according to the suit. First Islamic changed its name to Arcapita in March 2005, the compliant states.
In April 2005, the Beasleys entered into a sublease with BAA Maryland Inc., the developer of retail and concession space in the airport, to operate their restaurant in the Pier A/B Core Food Court, according to the suit. The franchise's menu, which included pork items, had to be submitted for approval and became part of the sublease, the suit states.
According to the complaint, the Beasleys had been assured they would be receiving the same letter Arcapita had sent to other existing franchisees, which said the parent company would not be collecting royalties on pork products.
But "approximately one week before" the Beasleys' May 18 opening, the suit states, Arcapita informed them that, as new franchisees who had not yet opened, they may not serve pork, which Islam considers unclean.
The restaurant opened on schedule -- but never served pork -- and closed in late July 2006.
Substantial losses
Part of the "substantial economic losses" the Beasleys suffered was the loss of their house, according to their attorney, Paul M. Vettori of Kenny & Vettori LLP in Towson.
"As the result of the failure of their business at the BWI airport, they were unable to repay the bank for the loan they took out and the [home] was sold at foreclosure," Vettori said.
Vettori declined to comment on other aspects of the suit, including other potential reasons for the short tenure of the restaurant.
Vettori is also the latest attorney to represent the Beasleys in a separate breach of contract suit against AFC, Arcapita, BAA Maryland and the Maryland Aviation Administration. That suit, filed in February 2007, is working its way through the Anne Arundel County Circuit Court.
James C. Rubinger of Plave Koch PLC in Reston, Va., who represents Arcapita in the state case, did not immediately return a call seeking comment Wednesday.
Haven't had time to investigate further
Fast food breakfast restaurants located in airports do a tone of business during brakfast hours and has the highest profit margins. Can you imagine breakfast without any pork products? No one would eat there.
So, you know before you sign the dotted line on buying a franchise.
Great concept. Doesn’t work so well when Islam is part of the mix, demanding no separation. At the point of a sword/gun.
The Constitution doesn’t provide freedom FROM religion.
The state has already established a religion - psychiatry. The state uses it in court houses everyday.
Church's and Popeye's used to both be owned by the same parent company, but Church's was sold to a new owner almost five years ago. AFAIK, Popeye's is not involved with the same investment bank.
Makes me wonder who else *is*, though.
KFC is being courted to offer halal meals (which includes segregated oils from non-halal products and meat sourced from Islamist butchers per Islamic law).
It’d be easier to make the whole menu halal than to segregate the kitchen equipment. And when facing a muslim run competitor, they don’t want to lose market share over something like that.
Who knows what Pepsico will do. Corporate America already surrendered to liberal special interest groups. Will they surrender to Islamic special interest groups too?
If it was a Jewish company, at least they could sell any Kosher pork they could get their hands on.
On a side note, remind me not to buy any Church’s chicken - for obvious reasons.
I am not sure if the contract says "because of the Sabbath", but I would venture a wild guess that the franchise agreement does prohibit being open on Sunday.
I seriously doubt that happened here, either. I'm unfamiliar with the Church's franchise agreement, but I'm absolutely positive it didn't contain any language about the menu. Typically, that sort of stuff is included in the manual, which is separate and apart from the franchise agreement. The franchise agreement will ALWAYS allow the franchisor, in its sole discretion, to change the manual at any time.
Just as an aside, Chick-fil-a disclaims franchise status. I think it is a franchise, but it claims that it's not. For whatever it's worth.
“And yes, I’m an intolerant bigot.”
Our membership is growing.
I disagree. Freedom OF religion allows me the freedom to NOT practice a religion.
I don’t like Churches chicken anyway. I will definately not buy from them since they are connected with some religious law of our enemy.
Franchises are a real gamble. An accountant friend of mine looked over a friends books for him to try to find out why he wasn’t making any money. He owned a 7-11.
After looking over the books, my friend told him that the way the franchise was structured most of any net profit went back to the parent corporation.
And this is why immigrants need to be required to conform to the existing laws of the land. I.e.: separation of church and state, and if they don’t like it they can leave.
We need bumper stickers.
A lot of franchises failed, so the pork restriction may not be why they failed.
However, the Sharia food rules put on a restaurant in the US should be illegal. This wasn’t KFC saying you can’t sell steak, we’re a chicken place - this was, you’re owned by Muslims, so you have to be Sharia compliant. But a lot of customers would have frequented other locations if they couldn’t get sausage or ham stuff at ONLY THAT LOCATION.
The couple probably isn’t the victim of racism - they’re victims of creeping jihad.
I am not sure about what’s in the contract only the ones I have seen are not open on Sunday.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.