Skip to main content
FranchiseVerdict

FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2025 filing

sweetFrog litigation history

What sweetFrog 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 & 4 at a glance

What the filing discloses

Cases disclosed
20
Item 3, as counted in the filing
Largest disclosed settlement
$661K
As stated in Item 3
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

Case 1: Purav Enterprises, L.L.C., et al. v. The Extreme Pita Franchising USA, Inc., et al. (Washington Superior Court, Case No. 15-2-15120-7). Filed June 22, 2015. Claims: FIPA violations, misrepresentation of financial performance, unregistered broker. Settled March 11, 2016 for $20,000. Case 2: KOHO, Inc. v. Kahala Franchising, L.L.C. (California Superior Court, Case No. BC572565). Filed February 17, 2015. Claims: breach of contract, unjust enrichment, declaratory relief. Cross-complaint filed by Kahala alleging breach, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, conversion, negligence. Bench trial June 15-16, 2016. Court granted judgment in favor of Kahala. Kahala awarded $205,000 in attorney's fees (July 18, 2016). Koho filed notice of appeal but failed to post appeal bond. Settlement reached June 19, 2017: Kahala repurchased territory for $75,000 and forgave $130,000 in remaining damages.

Disclosure signals that moved the score

How this shows up in the verdict

  • 20 litigation matters (moderate for large parent/216-unit system)

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?