What is Augusta Lawn Care's defense regarding the statute of limitations?
Augusta_Lawn_Care Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
Abraham Bilgoray v. Mike Andes, Augusta Franchise LLC, Augusta Franchise LLC Suite, and Augusta Lawn Care Corporation, Civil Action No. 7:25-cv-00584, pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (originally filed in the Supreme Court of New York, Rockland County, on December 16, 2024 and removed to federal court on January 21, 2025). Plaintiff is a former franchisee of Augusta Lawn Care that alleges fraud and negligent
misrepresentation, based on a purported non-receipt of Augusta's pre-signing Franchise Disclosure Document (the "FDD"). Plaintiff therefore seeks rescission of contracts and restitution. Augusta moved to stay, transfer, and/or dismiss on multiple grounds, including: (i) Plaintiff's franchise agreement requires that he bring any claim before the American Arbitration Association ("AAA"); (ii) to the extent Plaintiff was not required to file his claim in the AAA, he was required to file suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington; (iii) Plaintiff's claims are deficient under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; (iv) Plaintiff's fraud-based claims are without merit under the applicable documents; and (v) the applicable statute(s) of limitations bar Plaintiff's claims. Augusta denies any liability and is confident it will prevail in the litigation and recoup its attorneys' fees and costs incurred.
Source: Item 3 — LITIGATION (FDD pages 11–12)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to Augusta Lawn Care's 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, in a case filed by a former franchisee, Abraham Bilgoray v. Mike Andes, Augusta Franchise LLC, Augusta Franchise LLC Suite, and Augusta Lawn Care Corporation, one of Augusta Lawn Care's defenses is that the applicable statute of limitations bars the plaintiff's claims. The lawsuit, Civil Action No. 7:25-cv-00584, is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The original filing occurred in the Supreme Court of New York, Rockland County, on December 16, 2024, and was later moved to federal court on January 21, 2025.
The plaintiff in this case alleges fraud and negligent misrepresentation, claiming they did not receive Augusta Lawn Care's Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD) before signing the agreement. As a result, the plaintiff seeks rescission of the contracts and restitution. Augusta Lawn Care has responded by filing a motion to stay, transfer, and/or dismiss the case on several grounds, including the statute of limitations.
Augusta Lawn Care also argues that the franchise agreement requires the plaintiff to bring any claim before the American Arbitration Association (AAA) or, if not required to file in the AAA, to file suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Additionally, Augusta Lawn Care contends that the plaintiff's claims are deficient under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and that the fraud-based claims lack merit under the applicable documents. Augusta Lawn Care denies any liability and expresses confidence in prevailing in the litigation and recovering its attorneys' fees and costs.