ILNews

Andy Mohr target of Volvo Trucks lawsuit

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

When Volvo Group North America LLC sought to sell its semi trucks in the Indianapolis area, the company turned to veteran auto dealer Andy Mohr to help it gain a foothold in the market.

Volvo Trucks awarded Mohr a five-year contract to sell its trucks in April 2010. But, just two years into the relationship, the Greensboro, N.C., division of the Swedish automaker is suing Mohr, claiming he fraudulently induced it to enter into the franchise agreement.

The relationship between the two could get even messier, though, as a lawyer for Mohr says he’ll likely file a lawsuit against Volvo Trucks in the next week.

Volvo Trucks is seeking unspecified damages for lost market share and lost profits of more than $100,000, and wants the contract rescinded, according to the federal suit filed April 5.

The company claims Mohr, who has auto dealerships in Indianapolis, Avon, Fishers and Plainfield, enticed it to enter into the agreement by making several promises Mohr has been unable to fulfill.

Volvo Trucks said in its suit that Mohr has failed to sell 500 trucks per year, build a new sales facility, place an initial order of $1 million in parts, and purchase five new parts-delivery vans, all of which Volvo says he guaranteed.

“Despite receiving the dealer agreement for no money, and despite its many specific promises and commitments, Mohr Truck failed to fulfill its promises and commitments,” Volvo Trucks said in its complaint.

The Andy Mohr Truck Center is located at 1301 S. Holt Road on the southwest side of Indianapolis.

Mohr’s attorney, Robert MacGill of Barnes & Thornburg, said Volvo Trucks is to blame for the broken relationship, not his client.

“Andy Mohr Truck Center has notified Volvo of its claim for damages arising from Volvo’s conduct in inducing the sale of the franchise,” MacGill said.   

MacGill declined to elaborate but said details of Mohr’s argument will be provided in the suit he expects to file. This article originally ran in the April 11, 2012, issue of IBJ Daily. The Indianapolis Business Journal is a sister publication to IL.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • auto Transport Company auto Shipping transport Vehicle
    Ample knowledge about auto transport.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT