Skip to main content
FranchiseVerdict
Papa Murphy's logo
AStrongest tier69/100FDD 2024

Papa Murphy's: Litigation & Risk

Quick-Service Restaurants · FDD Items 3, 4 & 5

Back to overview

Elevated Risk

8 cases disclosed in FDD Items 3 and 4. Bankruptcy disclosed in Item 4.

Source: FDD Items 3–5

FDD Items 3 & 4

Litigation Metrics

Cases disclosed
8
Total from FDD Items 3 and 4
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
Disclosed
Franchisor or officer bankruptcy
Verdict score
69 / 100
FranchiseVerdict composite · higher is better
Rating
A
A / B / C / D / F verdict grade

7(a) FOIA data · FY2020–present

SBA Loan Performance

Aggregated from public SBA 7(a) loan disclosures. Charge-off rate is the share of loans that were charged off or settled for less than the full balance.

Total 7(a) loans
119
Government-backed loans issued
Charge-off rate
9.3%
vs 16% franchise average
5-yr charge-off rate
N/A
Defaults
10 loans
Loans charged off or defaulted
Total loan volume
$32.2M
Avg loan size
$271K
Participating lenders
52

FDD Items 5, 6 & 17: What You Give Up

Contract Risk Indicators

Mandatory arbitration
Not required
You retain the right to sue in court
Jury trial waiver
Not waived
Non-compete
2 yrs
Post-termination restriction on similar businesses
Franchisor can compete
Yes
Franchisor can open competing locations in or near your territory
Right of first refusal
Yes
Franchisor can match any purchase offer when you try to sell
Governing law
Washington
State whose law governs disputes. Relevant if you're not based there

Extracted from FDD Item 3

Litigation Detail

Multiple settled franchisee class-type actions (WFIPA claims re Item 19 representations) resolved 2014-2020 with payments ranging $10,000-$4,000,000 per group and several store buybacks; a declaratory judgment/tortious interference suit resolved via store purchase; and several state regulatory consent orders/settlements (Maryland, Virginia, New York) against MTY-affiliated predecessor brands (Triune/Blimpie/Maui Wowi/SweetFrog) for unregistered franchise sales or disclosure violations, with penalties from $2,500 to $50,000.

What drove the 69/100 verdict

Risk Score Breakdown

  1. 01MINORUnit count declining 2.3% YoY (1127 units) indicates system contraction and potential market saturation or operational challenges
  2. 02HIGHMultiple settled litigation cases involving misrepresentations and marketing obligations suggest compliance issues and franchisee disputes
  3. 03MINORNo average net income disclosure (Item 19) prevents assessment of actual profitability relative to $367-670K investment
  4. 04MINORUnprotected territory creates direct competition risk from other franchisees and corporate-owned locations in same area
  5. 05MINOR5% royalty on top of operating costs with declining unit economics may pressure franchisee margins
  6. 06MINORHigh investment range ($303K spread) with declining units raises questions about ROI and break-even timeline

Severity inferred from FDD text. Not a regulatory or legal classification

Litigation data from FDD Items 3, 4, and 5. SBA data from public 7(a) FOIA records (FY2020–present). Not legal advice. Consult a franchise attorney before signing any franchise agreement.