Lawsuit against Individual in small claims court

What is the name of your state? Florida

I currently have a case pending in small claims court againts an individual who performed work on my vehicle. He is the OWNER of the company. The company is part of a national chain of repair centers. However, each store is individually owned. Should I have filed against the owner or his Corporation or both ? Any Advice would help.

Too little information. Is the “corporation” that you refer to, the “national chain” or the “company that did the work”?

There can be many variations. What is yours?
I) National chain, individual franchises.
I)(a) individual franchise is (1) corporation or (2) “dba” (doing business as) or (3) other (eg. LLC, S-Corp. etc.)
II) National chain, corporate franchises (your assumption that the store is "individually owned" is wrong).
III) National chain, individual and corporate franchises (see I above).

You have to break it down. If you’re unsure if there is any form of corporate ownership, you can generally check with the franchise department of the “parent”.

If you know that it’s wholly-owned franchise of a national chain, you still have to figure out (I)(a) but the "parent" shouldn't be named.

smurally said:

What is the name of your state? Florida

I currently have a case pending in small claims court againts an individual who performed work on my vehicle. He is the OWNER of the company. The company is part of a national chain of repair centers. However, each store is individually owned. Should I have filed against the owner or his Corporation or both ? Any Advice would help.

Click to expand...

Personally, I would have filed against all three... (Owner, individually - the store itself - and the corporate parent)

Putting them all into one net, maybe letting them fight it out and taking a judgment against the "last man standing" is always a way to go, if you have no other choice. Personally, it's not my first choice, if you can make the distinctions, because it leaves you vulnerable to owing costs of defense to those that shouldn't have been named and are dismissed. It's a question of doing homework or ignoring it and paying a price. On the other hand, it's probably the way to go, if you can't be sure or can't do the homework.

Not enough information

The lawsuit is against the owner of the company d/b/a a national chain.

The lawsuit is against the owner of the company d/b/a a national chain.

That can’t be. If, by that, you imply that the “national chain” is a corporation, the name isn’t a dba, it’s the corporate name. Maybe you’re better off following Zigner’s advice, if the distinction is unclear. In that case, I hope that you have some part of the designation right. Otherwise you end up with a judgment that’s unenforceable and/or that must be amended.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, I take that back about the designation, but it could only be for (I)(a)(2) and then only if all requirements were met and the owner had registered the dba.