Steven A. Scheck, the former Burger King franchisee whose landmark legal battle challenged prevailing views of franchise encroachment and cannibalization and helped advance the application of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in franchising, has died.
More than three decades ago, Scheck placed his faith and confidence in a young Miami commercial trial lawyer named Robert Zarco to pursue a case that, according to Zarco, several larger, established law firms had assessed as being “worthless.”
Zarco disagreed. And so began a legal battle “Against All Odds.”
When Zarco left that firm to establish his own law practice in April 1992, he took Scheck and the case with him. Scheck took a gamble to go with the young attorney. Robert Zarco saw value where others did not, but more importantly, he saw a principle worth fighting for.
What followed became Scheck v. Burger King Corp., a landmark franchise dispute that challenged assumptions about the balance of power between franchisors and franchisees. The case became one of the defining matters of Zarco’s early career and helped shape his commitment to advocating for franchisees and business owners confronting substantially more powerful commercial adversaries. That mission continues through Zarco and his law firm today.
A Franchisee Who Refused to Back Down
Scheck owned a Burger King restaurant in Lee, Massachusetts, whose business benefited substantially from travelers on the Massachusetts Turnpike.
When another Burger King opened approximately two miles away at a Turnpike location positioned to intercept many of those customers, the impact was devastating.
According to Zarco at the time, Scheck lost approximately $300,000 annually in sales, representing 30 to 35 percent of his existing restaurant’s gross sales. The financial impact of the encroachment and resulting cannibalization ultimately forced Scheck into bankruptcy.
His franchise agreement, however, did not provide him with an exclusive territory.
Zarco argued that the absence of territorial exclusivity did not give a franchisor unlimited discretion to exercise its contractual rights in a manner that could deprive a franchisee of the benefits of the agreement.
At the center of the legal argument was the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
The “Key to the Courthouse”
Scheck faced another formidable obstacle. The financial damage to his business left him with diminished resources to finance complex litigation against a major international franchisor.
Zarco agreed to pursue the case on a contingency and results-accomplished attorney fee basis, providing what he would later describe as the “key to the courthouse.”
The arrangement enabled Scheck to pursue his claims despite the enormous disparity in financial resources between the parties.
That principle would become an important part of Zarco’s career: the size and economic power of an opponent should not determine whether an entrepreneur can protect his or her rights.
A Case That Changed the Conversation
In Scheck v. Burger King Corp., 756 F. Supp. 543 (S.D. Fla. 1991), U.S. District Judge William M. Hoeveler denied Burger King’s request for summary judgment on Scheck’s claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
The Court found that although Scheck was not entitled to an exclusive territory, that did not necessarily give Burger King an unfettered right to open nearby franchises regardless of their effect on his operations.
Burger King sought reconsideration. In Scheck v. Burger King Corp., 798 F. Supp. 692 (S.D. Fla. 1992), the Court refused to retreat from its earlier analysis.
The case attracted significant attention within the franchise community. In December 1992, the Miami Review featured the litigation under the headline “Burger King Faces Franchise Fight,” describing it as a “landmark in the making” and reporting that the dispute could change industry practices.
The case was ultimately resolved for an amount that has been publicly disclosed as exceeding several million dollars.
A case once assessed as having relatively little value had become an influential authority in franchise law and helped launch a career.
From One Franchisee’s Fight to a Lifelong Mission
For Zarco, Scheck became far more than an early case. It demonstrated that one franchisee, given the opportunity to be heard, could challenge an industry giant and influence the rights of those who followed.
Today, Robert Zarco is Founder and Managing Partner of Zarco Einhorn Salkowski, P.A., The Great Equalizers. Over the decades that followed, Zarco and the firm have represented thousands of franchisees associated with more than 500 franchise systems across 40+ states and 20+ countries, including 40+ franchisee associations, continuing the mission of creating leverage and leveling the playing field for franchisees.
The firm also continues to utilize creative hybrid contingency and results-accomplished fee arrangements in appropriate cases, helping qualifying franchisees and business entrepreneurs protect their interests when the cost of complex commercial litigation might otherwise put meaningful legal representation beyond their reach.
Remembering Steve Scheck
Scheck’s legacy, however, extends far beyond the case bearing his name. His professional relationship with Zarco became a friendship that endured for more than three decades.
“My dad was never afraid to stand up for what he believed was right,” said Hayley Scheck Antonian, Steven’s daughter. “He was an entrepreneur at heart, and he believed deeply in his businesses and the people he trusted. He took a chance on Robert more than three decades ago because he believed in him and in the case he was fighting. What began as a business relationship ultimately became a lifelong friendship. I’m incredibly proud that my dad’s courage and conviction became part of a legacy that continues to impact franchisees today.”
Zarco remembers both Scheck’s courage and the man behind it.
“Scheck was a wonderful human being. His larger than life physical presence was balanced by his warm heart and teddy bear personality, yet he remained firm in his convictions,” Zarco said. “The franchisee community respected him greatly for standing up for what he believed in and not living in fear of retaliation.”
“We developed a personal relationship that lasted more than three decades,” Zarco said. “We spoke frequently and supported each other through personal life issues as they arose. I will miss him.”
For the franchise community, Steven Scheck leaves the legacy of an entrepreneur willing to stand up for his business and his principles despite the imbalance of power he faced.
For Robert Zarco, Scheck was the client who believed in a young lawyer at a formative moment in his career and ultimately became a lifelong friend.
Steve Scheck believed in Robert Zarco. Robert Zarco believed in Steve’s cause. Together, they left an enduring mark on the balance of power between franchisors and franchisees, helping level the playing field and showing what can happen when conviction meets courage.
The rest is history.
