FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2026 filing

360 Painting litigation history

What 360 Painting disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document. Item 3 lists the material legal actions a franchisor must report; Item 4 covers bankruptcy. This is the franchisor's own disclosure, not a court record, and not legal advice.

Items 3 (litigation) & 4 (bankruptcy) at a glance

What the filing discloses

Cases disclosed: 24; Item 3, as counted in the filing

Largest settlement, franchisor's own cases: None stated

Bankruptcy (Item 4): None; Franchisor, parent, predecessor or officer

Filing year: 2026; Disclosures cover the prior ten years

Extracted from the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document

Item 3: litigation

24 disclosed actions including franchisor suits against former franchisees for trade secret misappropriation and unauthorized competing use of marks, franchisee suits alleging fraud/misrepresentation and FDD non-disclosure, litigation tied to the Purvelo brand acquisition dispute, and multiple state governmental consent orders/investigations (Maryland, Illinois, Virginia, California, Washington) for failure to disclose litigation in past FDDs.

Item 3 (litigation) · 24 matters disclosed · 9 pending listed

Litigation cases

The franchisor

Pending (3)

360 Painting, LLC v. Chshelokovskiy, et al.
pending
Brought by the franchisor · filed 2025-05-07 · U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia · 3:25-cv-00032
“… (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-00032).”Page 14 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The parties are presently engaged in discovery. 360 Painting, LLC intends to vigorously pursue its own claims against Chshelokovskiy and Nomad Contractors LLC and to defend against all counterclaims.”
360 Painting, LLC v. Gilliam, et al.
pending
Brought by the franchisor · filed 2025-05-07 · U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia · 3:25-cv-00033
“… (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-00033).”Page 14 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “parties are presently engaged in discovery. 360 Painting, LLC intends to vigorously pursue its claims against Gilliam, BridgeJam, LLC, and Nomad Contractors LLC.” (page 15)
360 Painting, LLC v. Glenn A. Misiph et. al.
pending
Brought by the franchisor · filed 2022-09-27 · U.S. District Court, Western District of Virginia; the claims were then litigated in the U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts · 3:22-cv-00056-NKM and 1:22-cv-11778-AK
“… (U.S. District Court, Western District of Virginia, Case No. 3:22-cv-00056-NKM).”Page 15 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Trial is presently set to begin on May 5, 2026. 360 Painting intends to vigorously defend the claims brought against it and to pursue its counterclaims against the Plaintiffs.”

Concluded (2)

In The Matter of the Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation v. 360 Painting, LLC, Pro-Lift Doors Franchise, LLC, Maid Right, LLC, Handyman Pro, LLC, Kitchen Wise, LLC, Renew Crew, LLC, Rubbish Works, LLC, and Paul Flick, an individual
concluded
Government or regulatory action · Administrative Proceeding Before the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation of the State of California · File Origination ID 33649, 26267, 110487, 293487, 292987, 339827, 99696, 365318, 403947
“… Administrative Proceeding Before the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation of the State of California, File Origination ID 33649, 26267, 110487, 293487, 292987, 339827, 99696, 365318, 403947, Consent Order dated November 19, 2021.”Page 19 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “a bar order against defendant Paul Flick from offering or selling franchises or filing franchise registrations in California for 36 months.” (page 20)
In the Matter of 360 Painting, LLC, and Paul Flick
concluded
Government or regulatory action · Administrative Proceeding Before the Securities Commissioner of Maryland · 2022-0226
“… Administrative Proceeding Before the Securities Commissioner of Maryland, Case No. 2022-0226.”Page 20 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “to pay to the Office of the Attorney General in conjunction with this Consent Order the sum of $50,000 as a civil monetary penalty”

Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor

Pending (6)

Mason v. Premium Service Brands, LLC, ProLift Doors Franchise, LLC, and Paul Flick
pending
Brought by a franchisee · Premium Service Brands, LLC · filed 2026-02-09 · Court of Common Pleas of Washington County, Pennsylvania · CV-2026-01080
“… (Case No. CV- 2026-01080, Court of Common Pleas of Washington County,”Page 16 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Defendants filed a motion on April 10, 2026, seeking to dismiss the action for lack of jurisdiction and improper venue based on the Franchise Agreement’s forum selection clause which requires all disputes to be brought in state or federal court serving Charlottesville, Virginia.”
Extraordinary Brands, LLC v. Kristin Watson
pending
Brought by the franchisor · Extraordinary Brands, LLC · filed 2025-12-03 · Circuit Court for the County of Albemarle, Commonwealth of Virginia · CL25002360-00
“… filed December 3, 2025, Circuit Court for the County of Albemarle, Commonwealth of Virginia, Case No. CL25002360-00.”Page 13 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Extraordinary Brands intends to pursue this litigation and the requested relief alongside its defense of” (page 14)
Kristin Watson v. Paul Flick, Carter Purves, AE Capital, LLC, Extraordinary Brands, LLC, Purvelo Franchising, LLC and Purvelo, Inc.
pending
AE Capital, LLC · filed 2025-07-31 · Circuit Court for the County of Albemarle, Commonwealth of Virginia · CL250001455-00
“… filed July 31, 2025, Circuit Court for the County of Albemarle, Commonwealth of Virginia, Case No. CL250001455-00.”Page 13 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Flick and the defendant parties intend to vigorously defend themselves in this matter, and bring counterclaims against Watson.”
Premium Service Brands, LLC v. Glenn A. Misiph
pending
Brought by the franchisor · Premium Service Brands, LLC · filed 2025-03-15 · Circuit Court for the City of Charlottesville, Commonwealth of Virginia · CL25000445-00
“… (Circuit Court for the City of Charlottesville, Commonwealth of Virginia, Case No. CL25000445-00).”Page 15 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The parties have not completed discovery, and no trial date is presently set. Premium Service Brands, LLC intends to vigorously pursue its claims against Misiph.”
Willett v. Window Gang, LLC and Paul Flick
pending
Brought by a franchisee · Window Gang, LLC · filed 2025-05-29 · U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia · 3:25-cv-00044
“… (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-00044).”Page 14 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The parties are presently engaged in discovery. Window Gang, LLC intends to defend against all claims and to vigorously pursue its own counterclaims against the franchisee.”
Rooterman, LLC v. Klodian Belegu, et al.
pending
Brought by the franchisor · Rooterman, LLC · filed 2024-12-05 · U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts · 1:24cv-13015
“… (U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts, Case No. 1:24cv- 13015). On December 5, 2024”Page 16 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The parties are currently engaged in discovery. Rooterman, LLC is vigorously pursuing its own claims and vigorously defending against Belegu’s counterclaims.”

Concluded (2)

Rooterman, LLC v. Mike Mehenni and Finish Connection, Inc.
concluded
Brought by the franchisor · Rooterman, LLC · filed 2025-03-25 · U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts · 1:25cv-10701
“… (U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts, Case No. 1:25cv-10701).”Page 17 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Defendants defaulted on the lawsuit, and the Court entered a default judgment on December 23, 2025 awarding Rooterman injunctive relief and damages of $288,579.27 with interest accruing.”
Rooterman, LLC v. Klodian Belegu, et al.
concluded
Brought by the franchisor · Rooterman, LLC · filed 2024-12-16 · American Arbitration Association, Boston Office · 012400090057
“Separate from the preliminary injunction matter, in Rooterman, LLC v. Klodian Belegu, et al. (American Arbitration Association, Boston Office, Case No. 012400090057)”Page 16 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “However, the parties stipulated that these claims need not be arbitrated and may continue to be litigated in the same federal suit identified above. Thus, the arbitration was dismissed.”

Status not stated in the filing (1)

Pro-Lift Doors Franchise, LLC v. Arukah LLC et al.
Brought by the franchisor · Pro-Lift Doors Franchise, LLC · filed 2025-11-03 · U.S. District Court, Western District of Virginia · 3:25-cv-00087-JHY-JCH
“… (U.S. District Court, Western District of Virginia Case No. 3:25-cv-00087-JHY-JCH).”Page 17 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Officers and directors (individuals, not the company)

Status not stated in the filing (1)

CHNC I, LLC v. Clean Juice Franchising, LLC, CJ Fresh Holdings, LLC, Landon Eckles, Caitlyn Eckles, David Cuff, Tripp Setliff and Collin Eckles
David Cuff · Circuit Court for the County of Oakland, Michigan · 2024-211191-CB
“… (Case No. 2024-211191-CB, Circuit Court for the County of Oakland, Michigan).”Page 16 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “CJ Fresh Holdings, LLC was not served with the lawsuit until January 15, 2025.” (page 17)

This list shows 15 of the 24 matters Item 3 discloses; the rest are in the filing.

Item 3 lists the litigation the franchisor must disclose; a matter against a parent, an affiliate or a named officer is not a matter against the franchisor, and pending claims are allegations, not findings.

Disclosure signals that moved the score

How this shows up in the verdict

Multiple litigation cases with former franchisees (Misiph, Belegu, DeGregorio, Carreno) suggest contract/relationship breakdown patterns

The verdict grade is FranchiseVerdict's editorial assessment across SBA loan performance, unit growth, revenue and disclosure signals. It is not investment advice.

Before you weigh a lawsuit

How to read Item 3

A franchisor must disclose pending actions and any material civil action involving the franchise relationship, plus convictions or civil judgments for fraud, unfair or deceptive practices, or franchise-law violations, going back ten years. A case the franchisor brought against a franchisee counts too. Item 3 does not include every dispute: settled claims below the materiality line and matters resolved in private arbitration can be absent.

Questions worth asking current and former franchisees, using the contact list in Item 20:

Were you, or anyone you know in the system, party to a dispute with the franchisor?
Was it resolved by settlement, arbitration or a court, and on what terms?
Has the number of disputes gone up or down since you signed?

Back to the 360 Painting verdict Risk analysis on the brand page Franchisee contacts for due-diligence calls