Do you think Hehlen’s employment contract was signed with Miller’s franchise or with Miller’s sole proprietorship? If you think Hehlen’s contract was with Miller’s franchise, should Miller have the right to enforce the contract provisions after H&R Block terminated her franchise agreement? Why or why not? [

In Margaret Miller's employment contract with Hehlen, it was made clear by the franchisee that the nature of her business was a branded tax franchise, known as H&R Block. Hehlen has worked for Miller for 15 years. So every year, Miller and Hehlen had to sign an employment agreement which was drawn up by H&R Block. The 2001 agreement was between Hehlen and “Margaret Miller, doing business as H&R Block".

Therefore, Hehlen's employment contract was signed with Miller's franchise and NOT Miller's sole proprietorship.

After H&R Block terminated her franchise agreement, Miller had no right to enforce the contract provisions because:

1. Hehlen's contract was with Miller's franchise and NOT with the sole proprietorship.

2. Miller was no longer "doing business as H&R Block" when she filed to enforce the employment agreement against Hehlen.

3. She could only enforce the employment agreement on her continuing business as H&R Block.

Therefore, Miller cannot enforce  the contract provisions after H&R Block terminated her franchise agreement because she WAS NO LONGER "doing business as H&R Block"

answer; i believe it was by president pranab mukherjee or by the chief justice of kerala high court; ///plz check luck

radiant energy is a form of kinetic energy only.(a)