Where must all disputes be litigated concerning an Augusta Lawn Care franchise?
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 17 — RENEWAL, TERMINATION, TRANSFER AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION (FDD pages 32–35)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
The 2025 Augusta Lawn Care Franchise Disclosure Document Item 3 discusses pending litigation involving Augusta Lawn Care and a former franchisee. The former franchisee's agreement allegedly requires that he bring any claim before the American Arbitration Association (AAA). To the extent the franchisee 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.
This information is relevant to prospective franchisees as it outlines the legal avenues and venues for resolving disputes with Augusta Lawn Care. It suggests that franchise agreements may contain clauses mandating arbitration or specifying a particular jurisdiction for lawsuits.
However, prospective franchisees should be aware of the Maryland addendum in Item 23, which states that a Maryland franchise regulation considers it an unfair or deceptive practice to require a franchisee to waive its right to file a lawsuit in Maryland claiming a violation of the Maryland Franchise Law. This addendum also notes that there is some dispute as to whether the forum selection requirement is legally enforceable in light of the Federal Arbitration Act. This means that the enforceability of the venue and method of dispute resolution may vary depending on the franchisee's location and the specific laws of that state.
It is important for potential Augusta Lawn Care franchisees to carefully review the franchise agreement and any applicable addenda to understand the dispute resolution process and their legal rights. They should also consult with an attorney to determine the enforceability of forum selection clauses and arbitration agreements in their specific jurisdiction.