Skip to main content
FranchiseVerdict

FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2025 filing

Comfort Keepers litigation history

What Comfort Keepers disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2025 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
6
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
2025
Disclosures cover the prior ten years

Extracted from the 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document

Item 3: litigation

6 cases: (1) Broach v. CKFI wage/hour class arbitration, settled 2018, CKFI paid $10K; (2) WA AG civil investigation re non-solicit provisions, settled 2018 via Assurance of Discontinuance; (3) CKFI v. 4 Seniors Home Care (Quebec master franchisee), settled 2019; (4) CA AG civil investigation re client services agreement provisions, settled 2024 with $500K fine; (5) Rupp v. CKFI et al. (negligence/client injury), pending trial April 2026; (6) Cooper v. CKFI et al. (negligence/client injury), filed July 2025, pending.

Item 3 (litigation) · 6 matters disclosed · 2 pending listed

Litigation cases

The franchisor

Pending (2)

  • Gertude Cooper v. Barbara Forman, The Salman Corporation, and CK Franchising, Inc.

    pending

    Brought by a third party · filed 2025-07-21 · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas for the County of Philadelphia · 250602391

    “… (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas for the County of Philadelphia, Case No. 250602391).”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
  • Roland Rupp, Sr. and Mary L. Rupp v. MD Enterprises, LLC, CK Franchising, Inc., et al.

    pending

    Brought by a third party · filed 2024-08-27 · Luzerne County, Court of Common Pleas · 202409205

    “… (Luzerne County, Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 202409205) This case was filed on or about August 27, 2024, by a client of a franchisee, claiming negligence, recklessness, conversion, and loss of consortium related to the injury of a franchisee’s client.”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (4)

  • Office of Attorney General for the State of California, Civil Investigation.

    judgment

    Government or regulatory action · filed 2022-05-04 · Office of Attorney General for the State of California

    “… On May 4, 2022, the Attorney General for the State of California initiated a civil investigation into provisions of CKFI’s standard form client services agreement including”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3

    Outcome: “CKFI and the DOJ agreed to a compromised settlement of this matter via a stipulated judgment effective October 8, 2024 requiring payment of fines in the amount of $500,000, removing the direct hire provision from its approved form of agreement for use by franchisees within the state of California,”

  • Office of Attorney General for the State of Washington, Civil Investigation.

    concluded

    Government or regulatory action · filed 2018-08-09 · Office of Attorney General for the State of Washington

    “… On August 9, 2018, the Attorney General for the State of Washington initiated a civil investigation into provisions of CKFI’s franchise agreement that provided that franchisees may”Page 15 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
  • Corrine Broach v. CK Franchising, Inc. and Salman Corp.

    settled

    Brought by a third party · filed 2016-01-22 · American Arbitration Association · 01-16-0000- 2234

    “… (American Arbitration Association, Case No. 01-16-0000- 2234). This arbitration was filed January 22, 2016 as a collective and class action claim by a former employee of a franchisee, claiming wage and hour laws violations related to unpaid overtime.”Page 15 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3

    Outcome: “On April 4, 2018, the parties entered into a settlement agreement approved by the arbitrator under which CKFI contributed $10,000 to a total settlement of $188,000, of which $100,000 was distributed to the class members, $4,000 to the class representative and $84,000 to counsel for the class members.”

  • CK Franchising, Inc. v. 4 Seniors Home Care, Inc.

    settled

    Brought by the franchisor · Quebec, Canada (C.S.M.) · C.S.M. 500-17-109194-194

    “… C.S.M. 500-17-109194-194. This litigation was initiated against 4 Seniors Homecare and its shareholder, Jill Eusenio, the Quebec Comfort Keepers Master Franchisee in Quebec, Canada.”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3

    Outcome: “This matter was settled in November 2019 by which the parties agreed to the termination of the Master Franchise Agreement, allowing the master franchisee 90 days to transition away from the brand and diligently inform unit franchises that 4 Seniors is no longer associated with Comfort Keepers.”

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

  • Active litigation including wage-and-hour class action and state AG investigations into non-solicit/hire practices creates operational and compliance risk
  • Master franchise termination in Quebec signals relationship breakdown and possible expansion strategy failure

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?