FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2026 filing

Dairy Queen litigation history

What Dairy Queen 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: 11; Item 3, as counted in the filing

Largest settlement, franchisor's own cases: $425K; 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

4 pending: Oshlo-Wilkinson DQ vs ADQ (contract/Iowa Franchise Act - transfer rights); ADQ vs Estate of Ridl (termination/trademark infringement); Rhode Island General Treasurer vs Domino's et al (securities class action naming ADQ officer D'Elia); Project Lonestar vs ADQ (breach of contract/transfer process). 4 concluded settlements. ADQ is plaintiff in Ridl and Project Lonestar counterclaims; defendant in others.

Item 3 (litigation) · 11 matters disclosed · 5 pending listed

Litigation cases

The franchisor

Pending (3)

American Dairy Queen Corporation vs. Estate of Josephine K. Ridl and Josephine K. Ridl Lifetime Trust
pending
Brought against a franchisee · filed 2025-07-21 · State of Minnesota First Judicial District Court, Carver County · 10-cv-251007
“… (State of Minnesota First Judicial District Court, Carver County, #10-cv-251007, filed July 21, 2025).”Page 19 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Oshlo-Wilkinson Dairy Queen vs. American Dairy Queen Corporation
pending
Brought by a franchisee · filed 2025-11-11 · District Court of Pottawattamie County, Iowa · LACV127235
“… (District Court of Pottawattamie County, Iowa, #LACV127235, filed Nov. 11, 2025).”Page 19 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Project Lonestar, Inc. vs. American Dairy Queen Corporation
pending
Brought by a franchisee · filed 2025-02-11 · United States District Court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division · 3:25-cv-00339-L
“… (United States District Court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, #3:25-cv-00339-L, filed February 11, 2025).”Page 18 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (4)

White Enterprise, Inc. vs. American Dairy Queen Corporation
settled
Brought by a franchisee · filed 2020-01-30 · American Arbitration Association · 01-20-0000-3584
“… (American Arbitration Association, Case No. 01-20-0000-3584, filed January 30, 2020).”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The parties reached a settlement on May 15, 2020 under which they agreed that, effective January 1, 2021, Claimant shall pay to ADQ a sales promotion fee of 2.5% of gross sales and ADQ shall provide Claimant with the full benefits available under the National Marketing Fund (''NMF") or any equivalent marketing program ADQ may make available to U.S. franchisees in the future.”
M & M Petroleum Too, Inc. vs. American Dairy Queen Corporation
settled
Brought by a franchisee · filed 2019-10-18 · American Arbitration Association · 01-19-0003-3181
“… (American Arbitration Association, #01-19-0003-3181, filed October 18, 2019).”Page 20 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The parties reached a settlement on March 12, 2020 under which they agreed to terminate the operating agreement effective April 15, 2020 and both parties agreed to waive their claims for damages, including ADQ’s claims for any unpaid fees owed by Petitioner.”
American Dairy Queen Corporation. vs. Universal Investment Corporation f/k/a Neos Corporation
settled
Brought against a franchisee · filed 2016-05-16 · United States District Court, Western District of Wisconsin · 16-cv-323
“… (United States District Court, Western District of Wisconsin, No: 16-cv-323, filed May 16, 2016).”Page 20 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The parties settled the remaining claims on December 11, 2017 with defendant agreeing to relinquish any remaining rights he may have to use ADQ’s trademarks and systems under, and to the termination of, his franchise agreement and the territory agreements for four territories in Iowa in exchange for a mutual release of claims and a payment of $425,000 from ADQ.”
Rodney Johnson and Food Ventures, Inc. vs. American Dairy Queen Corporation
settled
Brought by a franchisee · filed 2016-12-09 · American Arbitration Association · 01-16-0005-3571
“… (American Arbitration Association, No. 01-16-0005-3571, filed December 9, 2016).”Page 20 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “ADQ also paid claimants $25,000.”

Status not stated in the filing (2)

American Dairy Queen Corporation vs. AG Bros Kauffman, LLC, Rafael Araujo, Carlos Araujo
Brought against a franchisee · filed 2025-08-27 · American Arbitration Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota · 01-25-0004-0851
“… (American Arbitration Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 01-25-0004-0851, filed August 27, 2025)”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
American Dairy Queen Corporation vs. The Levittown Treat Company, LLC, Laura Maier, and Neal White
Brought against a franchisee · filed 2025-03-14 · American Arbitration Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota · 01-25-0001-3809
“… (American Arbitration Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 01-25-0001-3809, filed March 14, 2025).”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Officers and directors (individuals, not the company)

Pending (2)

State of Rhode Island Office of the General Treasurer, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated persons v. Domino’s Pizza, Inc., Russell J. Weiner, Sandeep Reddy, Joseph H. Jordan, and Arthur P. D’Elia
pending
Government or regulatory action · Arthur P. D’Elia (ADQ's Chief Operating Officer, US and Canada) · filed 2025-04-10 · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan · 2:24-CV- 12477-LVP-APP
“… (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, #2:24-CV- 12477-LVP-APP, filed April 10, 2025).”Page 18 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Patrick Ayers, Derivatively on behalf of Domino’s Pizza, Inc. v. Russell Weiner, et al; Daran Joshi, Derivatively on behalf of Nominal Defendant Domino’s Pizza, Inc. v. C. Andrew Ballard, et al; Christopher Kassner, Derivatively on behalf of Nominal Defendant Domino’s Pizza, Inc. v. C. Andrew Ballar
pending
Brought by a third party · Arthur P. D’Elia (ADQ's Chief Operating Officer) and other Domino's defendants · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan; 22nd Judicial Circuit, Washtenaw County, Michigan · 2:25-cv-10289-SJM-APP; 2:25-cv-10704-GAD-EAS; 25-000482-CB; 25-001352-CB; 2:26-cv-10501-RJW-KGA
“Mr. D’Elia and the other defendants also have been named as defendants in a number of derivative lawsuits filed by various plaintiffs (“Derivative Lawsuits”).”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.

Disclosure signals that moved the score

How this shows up in the verdict

Multiple litigation categories (contract disputes, trademark infringement, encroachment claims) suggest franchisor credibility and operational governance issues
Officer litigation history from previous franchise employment raises governance and compliance risk concerns

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 Dairy Queen verdict Risk analysis on the brand page Franchisee contacts for due-diligence calls