FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2022 filing
Red’s Savoy Pizza litigation history
What Red’s Savoy Pizza disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2022 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
- 1
- 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
- 2022
- Disclosures cover the prior ten years
Extracted from the 2022 Franchise Disclosure Document
Item 3: litigation
P & L Hagness, Inc. v. Reed Daniels and RSP Franchise, LLC (District Court, State of Minnesota, Fourth Judicial District, File No. 27-cv-20-118). Complaint filed January 16, 2020 by franchisee operator alleging tortious interference, unfair competition, trade practices violations, and unlawful restraint of trade related to compliance demands for tradenames and proprietary products. RSP filed answer with counterclaims for trademark infringement, deceptive trade practices, unjust enrichment, breach of contract, and violation of Minnesota Uniform Trade Secrets Act. Case settled March 2020 with P&L dismissing claims and exiting Red's Savoy Pizza system in exchange for agreement termination without monetary exchange. Both parties dismissed their respective claims.
Item 3 (litigation) · 1 matter disclosed
Litigation cases
The franchisor
Concluded (1)
P & L Hagness, Inc. v. Reed Daniels and RSP Franchise, LLC
settledBrought by a franchisee · filed 2020-01-16 · District Court, State of Minnesota, Fourth Judicial District · 27-cv-20-118
“… District Court, State of Minnesota, Fourth Judicial District, File No. 27-cv-20-118.”Page 12 of the 2022 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “We reached a settlement in March 2020 under which P&L agreed to dismiss their claims and leave the Red’s Savoy Pizza system, in exchange for an agreement to terminate their agreement with us, without the exchange of money.”
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
- Single resolved litigation matter, no money exchanged
- No bankruptcy, no going-concern, audited
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?