FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2024 filing

Arise Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham litigation history

What Arise Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2024 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: 8; 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: 2024; Disclosures cover the prior ten years

Extracted from the 2024 Franchise Disclosure Document

Item 3: litigation

No pending litigation against franchisor (WHR Extended Stay, LLC). One pending class action against Lodging Affiliates (Knuth v. Wyndham Worldwide et al., Saskatchewan, 2014, re Destination Marketing Fee). Six resolved matters against Lodging Affiliates (Luca resort fees; Brodsky Sherman Act; Pooniwala franchise termination; Roberts recording; Stone recording; FFC Capital breach; FTC cyberattack). No litigation against franchisees in past fiscal year.

Item 3 (litigation) · 8 matters disclosed · 1 pending listed

Litigation cases

Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor

Pending (1)

Norma Knuth v. Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, et al.
pending
Wyndham Worldwide, Wyndham Hotel Group, Days Inns Worldwide, Inc., Ramada Worldwide Inc., Super 8 Worldwide, Inc., Travelodge Hotels, Inc., and Wingate Inns International, Inc. (the Wyndham Entities) · filed 2014-12-05 · Court of Queen’s Bench for Saskatchewan, Judicial Centre of Regina · QBG-2650/2014
“… (Court of Queen’s Bench for Saskatchewan, Judicial Centre of Regina, QBG-2650/2014). On December 5, 2014, Plaintiff Norma Knuth filed a class action suit as a representative of all “persons, corporations, and entities, resident or situated in Canada . . .”Page 21 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (7)

Jay Brodsky v. Hilton Worldwide Inc., et al.
settled
Wyndham Hotels · filed 2018-08-20 · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · 2:18-cv-13045-KM-JBC
“… (United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Case 2:18-cv-13045-KM-JBC). On August 20, 2018, plaintiff Jay Brodsky filed an individual lawsuit against numerous hotel industry companies, including “Wyndham Hotels” Plaintiff alleged a per se violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act (in the form of bid rigging and a group boycott), and in”Page 22 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Defendants jointly settled for $7,000 payment ($1,400 as to Wyndham Hotels) to Mr. Brodsky on February 22, 2019, resulting in a dismissal of the action.”
Thomas Luca, Jr. v. Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, et al.
settled
Wyndham Hotel Group and Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC (remaining Wyndham Entities) · filed 2016-06-06 · United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania · 2:16-cv-00746-MRH
“… (United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Case 2:16-cv-00746-MRH). On June 6, 2016, Plaintiff Thomas Luca, Jr. filed a class action lawsuit against defendants Wyndham Worldwide, Wyndham Hotel Group, Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC and Wyndham Hotel Management, Inc. (the “Wyndham Entities”).”Page 22 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Wyndham Hotel Group and Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC entered into a settlement agreement with Plaintiff whereby a class was certified for settlement purposes and eligible class members will receive either $22 or 2,200 Wyndham Rewards points, and Wyndham will make certain display changes. The Court granted preliminary approval on October 18, 2019, and granted final approval on February 24, 2020.”
FFC Capital Corporation v. Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC
settled
Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC · filed 2014-02-28 · Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania · G.D. No. 14-003150
“… (Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania) (G.D. No. 14-003150). This lawsuit was filed on February 28, 2014, in Pennsylvania State Court, Allegheny County. FFC Capital Corporation (“FFC”) and Wyndham Hotel Group entered into a letter agreement on February 8, 2008 (the “Letter Agreement”) as to proposed acquisitions by affiliates”Page 24 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The parties entered into a settlement agreement on January 22, 2015, as part of which Wyndham Hotel Group made no admission of liability and paid FFC $260,000 and the case was dismissed.”
Percy Pooniwala and Dinaz Pooniwala v. Wyndham Worldwide, Inc., et al.
settled
Brought by a franchisee · Super 8 Worldwide, Inc., Travelodge Hotels, Inc., Days Inns Worldwide, Inc., and Wyndham Worldwide Operations, Inc. · filed 2014 · United States District Court for the District of Minnesota (served in the Fourth Judicial District, County of Hennepin, Minnesota) · 0:14-cv-00778
“… (United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, Case No. No. 0:14-cv-00778). On February 28, 2014, plaintiffs served a complaint upon Super 8 Worldwide, Inc., Travelodge Hotels, Inc., Days Inns Worldwide, Inc., and Wyndham Worldwide Operations, Inc. (the “Wyndham Entities”) in the Fourth Judicial”Page 22 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The parties reached a settlement in August 2015 as part of which plaintiffs made payments to the Wyndham Entities in the amount of $220,000 made in monthly payments from November 2015 until April 2017 and the case was dismissed on September 25, 2015.” (page 23)
FTC v. Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, et al.
dismissed
Government or regulatory action · Wyndham Worldwide, Wyndham Hotel Group, Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC and Wyndham Hotel Management, Inc. · filed 2012-06-26 · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (filed in the District of Arizona) · 13-cv-1887 (ES)(JAD)
“… (United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Case No. 13-cv-1887 (ES)(JAD)). On June 26, 2012, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court for the District of Arizona against Wyndham Worldwide, Wyndham Hotel Group, Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC and Wyndham Hotel Management, Inc.”Page 24 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The parties settled the case by executing a Stipulated Order for Injunction, which does not hold the Wyndham Entities liable for any violations, nor require it to pay any monetary relief. The Court entered the Order and dismissed the case with prejudice on December 11, 2015.”
Joyce Roberts, individually and on behalf of classes of similarly situated individuals v. Wyndham International, Inc., Wyndham Worldwide Operations, Inc., Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC & Does 1-10
settled
Brought by a third party · Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, LLC (predecessor franchisor to the Wyndham Franchisor, LLC Lodging Affiliate) · filed 2012-07-17 · Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Cruz (removed to United States District Court, Northern District of California) · RG 12639589
“… (Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Cruz (RG 12639589).”Page 23 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The Court granted final approval of the settlement and entered an order on the same, dismissing the lawsuit, on October 27, 2016.”
Loren Stone v. Howard Johnson International, Inc. & Does 1-10
settled
Howard Johnson International, Inc. and Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC · filed 2012-02-28 · United States District Court for the Central District of California (Los Angeles) · CV. 12 1684
“… (United States District Court for the Central District of California (Los Angeles), CV. 12 1684). On February 28, 2012, a purported class action complaint was filed against Howard Johnson International, Inc. and several fictitious defendants, alleging that defendants surreptitiously recorded telephone conversations with”Page 23 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The parties reached a settlement and executed a written settlement agreement with Wyndham Hotel Group, LLC denying any allegations of liability or wrongdoing and paying $1,500,000.00 into an account administered by the Claims Administrator. The court approved the settlement and the case was dismissed on November 30, 2015.” (page 24)

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 active and resolved class action litigations (destination marketing fees pending, resort fees, website terms, advertising, retaliation, wiretapping) suggest systemic corporate governance and consumer trust issues

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 Arise Suites Extended Stay by Wyndham verdict Risk analysis on the brand page