FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2025 filing

Keke’s Breakfast Café litigation history

What Keke’s Breakfast Café 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: 3; 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

Three cases disclosed: (1) 50 East Thousand Oaks LLC v Denny's Inc. (CA, 2014) - breach of contract/misrepresentation, settled for $115,000 in 2016; (2) Rogers Family Foods v DFO LLC (MN, 2019) - royalty dispute, dismissed with prejudice 2021; (3) RWDT Foods v DFO LLC and Denny's Inc. (SC, 2022) - breach of contract and multiple claims, pending as of disclosure. No lawsuits filed by franchisor in 2024.

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

Litigation cases

Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor

Pending (1)

RWDT FOODS, INC. v DFO, LLC AND DENNY’S, INC.
pending
Brought by a franchisee · DFO, LLC and Denny’s, Inc. (our affiliates) · filed 2022-08-30 · Court of Common Pleas for Charleston County, South Carolina · 2022-CP-1004030
“… (Court of Common Pleas for Charleston County, South Carolina, Case No. 2022-CP-1004030) On August 30, 2022, RWDT, Inc. filed a complaint against DFO, LLC and Denny’s, Inc. (collectively, “Denny’s”) in the Court”Page 14 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (2)

Rogers Family Foods, LLC v DFO, LLC
dismissed
Brought by a franchisee · DFO, LLC (our affiliate) · filed 2019-06-05 · United States District Court, District of Minnesota · 19- CV-1476
“… (United States District Court, District of Minnesota Case No. 19- CV-1476) On June 5, 2019, Rogers Family Foods, LLC (Plaintiff) filed a complaint against DFO, LLC (Defendant) in the United States District Court, District”Page 14 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Order for Dismissal with Prejudice granted January 22, 2021. RWDT FOODS, INC. v DFO, LLC AND DENNY’S, INC.; (Court of Common Pleas for Charleston County, South Carolina, Case No. 2022-CP-1004030) On August 30, 2022, RWDT, Inc. filed a complaint against DFO, LLC and Denny’s, Inc. (collectively,”
50 East Thousand Oaks, LLC v Denny’s, Inc.
settled
Brought by a third party · Denny’s, Inc. (DI, our affiliate) · filed 2014-10-24 · Superior Court of California, County of Ventura · 56-2014-00456852-CU-CO-VTA
“… (Superior Court of California, County of Ventura, Case No. 56-2014-00456852-CU-CO-VTA) On October 24, 2014, 50 East Thousand Oaks, LLC (Plaintiff), filed a complaint against Denny’s, Inc. in the Ventura County Superior Court alleging breach of contract and intentional and negligent misrepresentation.”Page 14 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Under the settlement, DFO and affiliates paid $115,000 in exchange for a release of all claims. Rogers Family Foods, LLC v DFO, LLC (United States District Court, District of Minnesota Case No. 19- CV-1476) On June 5, 2019, Rogers Family Foods, LLC (Plaintiff) filed a complaint against DFO, LLC”

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

Three pending/settled litigation cases involving parent company affiliates (DFO, LLC and Denny's, Inc.) suggest structural or operational disputes within the franchise system
Pending litigation as of 2023 (RWDT FOODS case) remains unresolved, creating uncertainty around franchisor stability and potential financial liability to franchisees

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 Keke’s Breakfast Café verdict Risk analysis on the brand page Franchisee contacts for due-diligence calls