FranchiseVerdict
Rooster & Rice logo
A51/100FDD 2025

Rooster & Rice — Litigation & Risk

Food & Beverage - Full Service · FDD Items 3, 4 & 5

Back to overview

Lower Risk

No litigation cases disclosed in FDD Items 3 and 4.

Source: FDD Items 3–5

FDD Items 3 & 4

Litigation Metrics

Cases disclosed
0
Total from FDD Items 3 and 4
Bankruptcy (Item 4)
—
Franchisor or officer bankruptcy
Overall risk score
51 / 100
FranchiseVerdict composite
Rating
STRONG
STRONG / MODERATE / CAUTION / AVOID

FDD Items 5, 6 & 17 — what you give up

Contract Risk Indicators

Mandatory arbitration
Required
Disputes resolved outside court — limits your legal options
Jury trial waiver
Waived
You give up the right to a jury trial
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
California
State whose law governs disputes — relevant if you're not based there

What drove the 51/100 rating

Risk Score Breakdown

  1. 01MEDNet income not disclosed in FDD — unable to verify actual profitability or ROI on $353k-$560k investment
  2. 02MINOROnly 8 units system-wide with unknown growth trajectory — insufficient data on unit economics and franchise viability
  3. 03MINORHigh investment-to-revenue ratio ($353k-$560k for ~$797k avg revenue) suggests thin margins and extended payback period
  4. 04MINORNo Item 19 financial performance representations — franchisor not substantiating claimed average revenue with actual franchisee data
  5. 05MINORSmall franchisee base creates concentration risk and limits validation pool for due diligence

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.