FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2025 filing
Margaritaville Hotels & Resorts litigation history
What Margaritaville Hotels & Resorts 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
1) Boss Investments Ltd. v. Margaritaville of Bahamas et al. - trademark sub-license dispute, settled 2020 with dismissal with prejudice and royalty sharing agreement. 2) Shultz et al. v. Margaritaville Enterprises et al. - cottage owner fraud/tort claims, settled 2023 with mutual walk-away. 3) California Commissioner of Financial Protection v. Margaritaville Hotels & Resorts, LLC - failure to file exemption notices for 3 CA franchise sales, resolved by 2020 consent order with $7,500 penalty.
Item 3 (litigation) · 3 matters disclosed
Litigation cases
The franchisor
Concluded (1)
The Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation v. Margaritaville Hotels & Resorts, LLC
concludedGovernment or regulatory action · filed 2020-03-07 · Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, State of California
“… (Administrative Proceeding Before the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, State of California).”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor
Concluded (2)
Stephen W. and Catherine C. Shultz, as Co-Trustees of the Stephen and Catherine Shultz Trust Dated January 9, 2006; Alesandra D. Shultz, as Trustee of the Alesandra D. Shultz Living Trust U/A/D April 12, 2018; and John D. Koptieff, and Wife, Susan C. Koptieff v. Margaritaville Enterprises, LLC; John
settledMargaritaville Enterprises, LLC (one of our parent companies), John Cohlan and James Wiseman · filed 2020 · Circuit Court of the Ninth Judicial Circuit in and for Osceola County, Florida · 2020 CA 00051 OC
“Stephen W. and Catherine C. Shultz, as Co-Trustees of the Stephen and Catherine Shultz Trust Dated January 9, 2006; Alesandra D. Shultz, as Trustee of the Alesandra D. Shultz Living Trust U/A/D April 12, 2018; and John D. Koptieff, and Wife, Susan C. Koptieff v. Margaritaville Enterprises, LLC;”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “On April 27, 2023, the parties entered into a Settlement Agreement, agreeing to terminate and resolve the case through a mutual walk-away and dismissal of the case with prejudice, with each party bearing its own attorneys’ fees and costs.”
Boss Investments Limited a/k/a Boss Investments Ltd. v. Margaritaville of Bahamas, LLC, Margaritaville Enterprises, LLC, Margaritaville Holdings LLC, and James Wiseman
settledMargaritaville Enterprises, LLC and Margaritaville Holdings LLC (our parent companies), with Margaritaville of Bahamas, LLC and James Wiseman · filed 2018-10-26 · Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida · 2018-Ca-013658
“… (Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, Case No. 2018-Ca-013658).”Page 15 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “This matter was settled pursuant to the Amended Confidential Mediated Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) and Third Amendment to Trademark Sub-License Agreement, dated as of December 30, 2020.” (page 16)
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 events including trademark disputes, conspiracy lawsuits, and regulatory violations indicate operational and legal instability
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?