FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2024 filing

Postcard Cabins litigation history

What Postcard Cabins disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2024 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: 20; 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: 2024; Disclosures cover the prior ten years

Extracted from the 2024 Franchise Disclosure Document

Item 3: litigation

Item 3 discloses multiple litigation matters: (A) Data Security Incident — MDL class actions (1), City of Chicago action (2), administrative investigations (3), Canadian class actions (4); (B) Resort/destination fees — DC v. Marriott (1), Todd Hall v. Marriott (2); (C) Franchisor initiated — Arkansas Knoxville Hotel arbitration (1); (D) Other pending — Fifth and Fifty-Fifth Residence Club (1), Tempe Hospitality Ventures (2), Portillo v. CoSTAR (3), Segal v. Amadeus (4); (E) Concluded — Rahman v. MII (1), HPT CY TRS arbitration (2), Rivera v. MII (3), Puleo v. MII (4), Cityfront Hotel v. Starwood (5)

Item 3 (litigation) · 20 matters disclosed · 12 pending listed

Litigation cases

Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor

Pending (12)

Portillo v. CoSTAR Group, Inc.
pending
Brought by a third party · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2024-02-20 · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · 2:24-cv-00229
“… Case No. 2:24-cv-00229, United States District Court for the Western District of Washington.”Page 27 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Segal v. Amadeus IT Group, S.A.
pending
Brought by a third party · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2024-03-01 · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois · 1:24-cv-01783
“… Case No. 1:24-cv-01783 (U, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.”Page 27 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Marriott International, Inc., et al. v. Arkansas Knoxville Hotel, LP, et al.
pending
Brought by the franchisor · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2023-08-31 · American Arbitration Association · 01-23-0003-8672
“Marriott International, Inc., et al. v. Arkansas Knoxville Hotel, et al., Case No. 01-23- 0003-8672, American Arbitration Assoc.”Page 26 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Tempe Hospitality Ventures LLC v. The Sheraton LLC
pending
Brought by a franchisee · The Sheraton LLC (SLC, franchisor of pre-2017 Sheraton agreements) · filed 2022-09-29 · U.S. District Court, District of Arizona · 2:22-cv-01577-ESW
“… Case No. 2:22-cv-01577-ESW (D. Az). On September 29, 2022, Tempe Hospitality Ventures LLC ("Tempe Hospitality”), a former franchisee of The Sheraton LLC, filed a lawsuit against The Sheraton LLC alleging”Page 27 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
City of Chicago v. Marriott International, Inc., et al.
pending
Government or regulatory action · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2019-02-14 · U.S. District Court, District of Maryland · 8:19-cv-00654
“2. City of Chicago v. Marriott International, Inc., et al., Case No. 8:19-cv-00654 (D. Md.). On February 14, 2019, the City of Chicago (the “City”) filed an action against Marriott under Section 2- 25-090 of the Municipal Code of Chicago.”Page 24 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
District of Columbia v. Marriott International, Inc.
pending
Government or regulatory action · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2019-07-09 · D.C. Superior Court · 2019 CA 004497 B
“… Case No. 2019 CA 004497 B (D.C. Super. Ct.). On July 9, 2019, the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit against MII in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia alleging violations of the District of Columbia’s Consumer Protection Procedures Act (“CPPA”), D.C.”Page 25 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
In re Marriott International Customer Data Security Breach Litigation
pending
Brought by a third party · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) and Starwood · filed 2019-02-06 · U.S. District Court, District of Maryland (MDL) · MDL No. 19-md-2879
“… (MDL No. 19-md- 2879). Numerous putative class actions and some individual actions have been filed against Starwood and MII in U.S. federal and state courts alleging, among other claims,”Page 23 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Todd Hall v. Marriott, International, Inc.
pending
Brought by a third party · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2019-09-09 · U.S. District Court, Southern District of California · 19-cv-1715-JLS-AHG
“… Case No. 19-cv-1715-JLS-AHG (S.D. Cal.). On September 9, 2019, a putative class action was filed against MII in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California alleging violations of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Cal. Civ.”Page 26 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Turkish Personal Data Protection Authority (“KVKK”) Action
pending
Government or regulatory action · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2019-05-16 · Turkish Personal Data Protection Authority (KVKK) · Decision No. 2019/143
“… Following an investigation into the Data Security Incident, the KVKK issued Decision No. 2019/143 on May 16, 2019.”Page 24 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Canadian Actions
pending
Brought by a third party · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent), Starwood and Canadian affiliates · Courts of British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia (consolidated in Ontario)
“4. Canadian Actions. Following the disclosure of the Data Security Incident, 16 putative class action lawsuits were commenced in British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, Quebec, and Nova Scotia.”Page 25 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
The Fifth and Fifty-Fifth Residence Club Association, Inc. v. Vistana Signature Experiences, Inc., et al.
pending
Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County · 151907/2019
“… Case No. 151907/2019, Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York Co. This matter originally consisted of two actions concerning residences in the”Page 26 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
U.S. Investigations
pending
Government or regulatory action · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · Attorneys General of 50 states and D.C.; Federal Trade Commission
“… Attorneys General from all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia (the “AGs”), the Federal Trade Commission, and certain committees of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives have made inquiries, opened investigations, or requested information and/or documents relating to the Data Security Incident and related matters.”Page 24 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (7)

Rahman et al. v. Marriott International, Inc.
settled
Brought by a third party · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2020-04-03 · U.S. District Court (C.D. Cal.) · SA CV 20-00654-DOC-KES
“… No. SA CV 20-00654-DOC-KES. On March 31, 2020, MII notified guests of a property system incident involving guest information that may have been improperly accessed through the use of login credentials of two franchise employees at a franchise property (“Property System Incident”).”Page 28 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Information Commissioner’s Office in the United Kingdom (the “ICO”) Action
concluded
Government or regulatory action · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2019 · U.K. Information Commissioner's Office
“… In July 2019, the ICO issued a formal notice of intent under the U.K.”Page 24 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Jamil Rivera v. Marriott International, Inc. and International Hospitality Enterprises, Inc.
settled
Brought by a third party · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2019-09-18 · U.S. District Court, District of Puerto Rico · 19-cv-01894-GAG
“… 19-cv-01894-GAG (D.P.R.). On September 18, 2019, a putative class action was filed against MII and International Hospitality Enterprises, Inc. in the United States”Page 28 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Robert Puleo v. Marriott International, Inc., International Hospitality Enterprises, Inc., and Condado Duo, La Concha, SPV, LLC
settled
Brought by a third party · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2019-09-20 · U.S. District Court, District of Puerto Rico · 19-cv-01893-WGY
“… 19-cv-01893-WGY (D.P.R.).”Page 28 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Cityfront Hotel Associates Limited Partnership, et al. v. Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc., et al.
settled
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. and Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2016-05-10 · Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York · 652521/2016
“… (Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Case No. 652521/2016).”Page 29 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
Canadian Office of the Privacy Commissioner (“OPC”) Investigation
concluded
Government or regulatory action · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
“… Following an investigation into the Data Security Incident, the OPC found that allegations against MII relating to the Data Security Incident were well-founded.”Page 25 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3
HPT CY TRS, Inc. and HPT TRS MRP, Inc., v. Marriott International, et al.
judgment
Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) and affiliated Managers · Arbitration · 01-20-0009-9886
“… (Arbitration No. 01-20-0009-9886). Our affiliates Residence Inn by Marriott, LLC, TownePlace Management, LLC, Courtyard Management Corporation, Marriott Hotel Services, Inc., Essex”Page 28 of the 2024 FDD, Item 3

Status not stated in the filing (1)

Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (the “OAIC”) Investigation
Government or regulatory action · Marriott International, Inc. (MII, our parent) · filed 2022-12-19 · Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
“… Following an investigation into the Data Security Incident, the OAIC issued an Enforceable Undertaking on December 19, 2022.”Page 25 of the 2024 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

Major data security litigation (Starwood breach) and government investigations create ongoing liability exposure for 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 Postcard Cabins verdict Risk analysis on the brand page Franchisee contacts for due-diligence calls