Steak n Shake pays settlement to former ad agency

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Steak n Shake, which last year lost a breach-of-contract lawsuit brought by its former advertising agency, has settled the case through mediation rather than let the court decide damages.

The Indianapolis-based restaurant chain quietly agreed in mid-February to pay $237,500 to the bankruptcy estate of former Varnson Group CEO Alan Varnson, ending a high-profile legal fight that began in July 2009.

The case was officially dismissed March 29, avoiding a trial that had been scheduled for Monday to determine damages.

Steak n Shake signed a $4.36 million, 26-month contract with the now-defunt Buford, Ga.-based Varnson Group in November 2008.

The signing drew wide notice in advertising circles because it marked the first agency switch for Steak n Shake in nearly two decades. The restaurant chain parted ways with Indianapolis-based Young & Laramore, its ad agency of 18 years, earlier in 2008.

But Steak n Shake’s relationship with Varnson soured almost immediately and it fired the firm less than three months after signing the contract for undisclosed reasons. Industry sources said at the time that the restaurant chain wasn’t happy with the speed in which Varnson was working on a new ad campaign.   

The two firms sued each other after the breakup, with Varnson claiming Steak n Shake failed to live up to the contract agreement and the chain claiming the now-defunct ad agency refused to return proprietary materials.

Steak n Shake signed a contract with Varnson that would pay the ad agency $178,333 per month, court documents said. The contract stipulated that the deal could be cancelled by Steak n Shake at any time, but that the agreement would continue for 90 days after the company gave termination notice to Varnson officials.

Last September, a district court in Indiana ruled that Steak n Shake breached its contract with Varnson. It said damages would be determined at another trial or through settlement.

The settlement won’t go to principals of the agency, which declared Chapter 7 bankruptcy and went out of business later in 2009. The damages, said Varnson trust representatives, would go to settle outstanding debt.

More than a third of the settlement, however, will go to two law firms, with Indianapolis-based Stewart & Irvin collecting $81,316 and Louisville-based Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP getting $9,025.


  • Steak...
    lawyers get 33% instead of creditors. Tell me again why they charge that much?

Post a comment to this story

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 IBJ 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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.