FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2026 filing

Buffalo Wild Wings litigation history

What Buffalo Wild Wings 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: 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

One pending class action (Halim) alleging deceptive "boneless wings" marketing. Two concluded consumer class actions settled for $47,500 and $115,000 over delivery/service fee disclosure. Additional settled actions against affiliates (Arby's Restaurant Group, Dunkin' Brands) over no-poaching provisions and a data breach, and a Jimmy John's FDD disclosure consent order - none allege wrongdoing by Buffalo Wild Wings itself.

Item 3 (litigation) · 7 matters disclosed · 1 pending listed

Litigation cases

The franchisor

Concluded (1)

Divane Pittman v. Buffalo Wild Wings International, Inc. and Inspire Brands, Inc.
concluded
Brought by a third party · filed 2022-07-12 · United States District Court for the State of Maryland (removed from Maryland state court) · 8:22-cv-02173-GJH
“… (United States District Court for the State of Maryland, Case No.”Page 27 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The case was dismissed with prejudice on November 29”

Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor

Pending (1)

Halim v. Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc. and Inspire Brands, Inc.
pending
Brought by a third party · Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc. (Parent/guarantor) and Inspire Brands, Inc. · filed 2023-03-10 · United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois · 1:23-cv-01495
“… (United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Case No.”Page 26 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint on March 20, 2026. Defendants deny any liability in this matter and intend to continue to”

Concluded (5)

Michelle Wheeldon, Lauran Hopper, and Tamara Wilson v. Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc.
concluded
Brought by a third party · Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc. · filed 2021-11-16 · United States District Court for the District of Arizona · 2:21-cv-01947-DLR
“… (United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Case No.”Page 26 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “On March 30, 2022, the parties entered into a Confidential Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release whereby Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc. agreed to pay plaintiffs a total sum of $47,500 in”
New York v. Dunkin’ Brands, Inc.
concluded
Government or regulatory action · Dunkin Brands, Inc. · filed 2019-09-26 · N.Y. Supreme Court for New York County · 451787/2019
“… (N.Y. Supreme Court for New York County, Case No. 451787/2019, filed September 26, 2019). In this matter, the N.Y.”Page 28 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “On September 21, 2020, without admitting or denying the NYAG’s allegations, DBI and the NYAG entered into a consent agreement to resolve the State’s”
The People of the State of California v. Arby’s Restaurant Group, Inc.
concluded
Government or regulatory action · Arby’s Restaurant Group, Inc. · filed 2019-03-19 · California Superior Court, Los Angeles County · 19STCV09397
“… (California Superior Court, Los Angeles County, Case No. 19STCV09397, filed March 19, 2019).”Page 27 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Under the settlement agreement, ARG paid no money but agreed (a) to remove the disputed provision from its franchise agreements”
The People of the State of California v. Dunkin’ Brands, Inc.
concluded
Government or regulatory action · Dunkin Brands, Inc. · filed 2019-03-19 · California Superior Court, Los Angeles County · 19STCV09597
“… (California Superior Court, Los Angeles County, Case No.”Page 27 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “the action was closed after the court approved the parties’ stipulation of” (page 28)
In the Matter of Jimmy John’s Franchisor SPV LLC
concluded
Government or regulatory action · Jimmy John’s Franchisor SPV LLC · Securities Commissioner of Maryland · 2025-0122
“… (Securities Commissioner of Maryland, Case No. 2025-0122).”Page 28 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Commissioner and JJF entered into a Consent Order on June 9, 2025. Under the terms of the Consent Order, JJF agreed to pay a $30,000 civil monetary”

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 Buffalo Wild Wings verdict Risk analysis on the brand page Franchisee contacts for due-diligence calls