FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2026 filing

Ben & Jerry’s Kiosk litigation history

What Ben & Jerry’s Kiosk 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: 7; Item 3, as counted in the filing

Largest settlement, franchisor's own cases: $25K; As stated in Item 3

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

Item 3 discloses 8 distinct cases: (1) Class I Directors of Ben & Jerry's board (on behalf of Ben & Jerry's Homemade) v. Conopco/Unilever PLC/Ben & Jerry's Holdco/TMICC - breach of 2000 Acquisition Agreement and settlement agreement, pending; (2) Dana Hughes v. Homemade - CA Trap and Trace Law/TikTok tracking claim, pending; (3) Center for Environmental Health v. Aesop USA et al. (incl. Homemade) - CA Prop 65 BPS thermal paper claim, pending; (4) Mittal v. Unilever/TMICC/Senf - defamation/false light by former board chair, pending; (5) Dovid Tyrnauer v. Homemade - class action re: alleged migrant child labor supply chain, dismissed 2024; (6) Ido Ben-Ami v. Homemade (Israel) - anti-discrimination class action re: Israel/disputed territories, settled 2022 for $25,000 combined with Spiegelman case; (7) Rebecca Spiegelman v. Homemade (Israel) - same subject, settled jointly; (8) Avi Avraham Zinger/American Quality Products v. Homemade/Unilever US/Conopco - license termination dispute, settled 2022 via new business arrangement.

Item 3 (litigation) · 7 matters disclosed · 4 pending listed

Litigation cases

The franchisor and its predecessor

Pending (3)

Center for Environmental Health v. Aesop USA, Inc., et al.
pending
Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc. (our parent and predecessor) · filed 2025-07-21 · Superior Court for the State of California, County of San Francisco · CGC-25-623997
“Center for Environmental Health v. Aesop USA, Inc. Superior Court for the State of California, County of San Francisco, Case No. CGC-25-623997.”Page 19 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Dana Hughes v. Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc.
pending
Brought by a third party · Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc. (our parent and predecessor) · filed 2025-01-15 · Superior Court for the State of California · 25STCV01128
“… Superior Court for the State of California, Case No. 25STCV01128. On January 15, 2025, Dana Hughes (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc. (“Homemade”) alleging that Defendant’s marketing practices violate California’s Trap and Trace Law.”Page 19 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc., Class I Directors of Ben & Jerry’s Independent Board v. Conopco, Inc. and Unilever PLC
pending
Brought by the franchisor · Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc. (our parent and predecessor), as plaintiff · filed 2024-11-13 · U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York · 1:24-cv-08641-PKC
“… United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Case No.: 1.24-cv-08641-PKC.”Page 18 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (3)

Dovid Tyrnauer v. Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc.
dismissed
Brought by a third party · Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc. (our parent and predecessor) · filed 2023-03-03 · U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; transferred to the District of Vermont · 1:23-cv-01877; 2:23-cv-00299-cr
“… United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, White Plains Division, Case No. 1:23-cv-01877.”Page 20 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Avi Avraham Zinger and American Quality Products Ltd. v. Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc., Unilever United States, Inc. and Conopco, Inc.
settled
Brought by a franchisee · Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc. (our parent and predecessor) · filed 2022-03-03 · U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey · 2:22-cv-01154-KM-JBC
“… United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Case No.: 22:22-cv-01154-KM-JBC.”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Ido Ben-Ami v. Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc.; Rebecca Spiegelman v. Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc. (Israeli class actions)
settled
Brought by a third party · Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc. (our parent and predecessor) · filed 2021-07-21 · Central District Court of Israel · 45950-07-21; 46391-07-21
“Ben-Ami and Spiegelman Class Action Ido Ben-Ami v. Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc., Class Action No. 45950-07-21 (Central Dist. Ct. of Israel), filed on July 21, 2021 (the “Ben-Ami Case”); and Rebecca Spiegelman v. Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc., Class Action No. 46391-07-21 (the “Spiegelman Case”)).”Page 20 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “the Ben Ami Case and the Spiegelman Case were settled for a combined nominal amount of $25,000, to be split equally, and were subsequently dismissed. *** Avi Avraham Zinger and American Quality Products Ltd. v. Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc., Unilever United States, Inc. and Conopco, Inc., United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Case No.: 22:22-cv-01154-KM-JBC.” (page 21)

Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor

Pending (1)

Mittal v. Unilever PLC, et al.
pending
Unilever PLC and The Magnum Ice Cream Company N.V. (upstream parents); Jochanan Senf · filed 2026-03-26 · U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California · 4:26-cv-02660
“… United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 4:26-cv-02660.”Page 19 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

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.

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 Ben & Jerry’s Kiosk verdict Risk analysis on the brand page