Does the Michigan law affect the City Publications franchise agreement outside of Michigan?
City_Publications Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
TATE OF INDIANA**
| STATE | EFFECTIVE DATE |
|---|---|
| California | April 21, 2024 |
| Hawaii | |
| Illinois | April 30, 2024 |
| Indiana | June 21, 2024 |
| Maryland | November 4, 2024 |
| Michigan | July 16, 2024 |
| Minnesota | September 17, 2024 |
| New York | June 13, 2024 |
| North Dakota | |
| Rhode Island | |
| South Dakota | |
| Virginia | November 15, 2024 |
| Washington | October 18, 2024 |
| Wisconsin | October 7, 2024 |
FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND
This Amendment to the Franchise Agreement is agreed to this day of, 20, between CITY PUBLICATIONS FRANCHISE GROUP, INC. and as follows: to amend and revise said Franchise Agreement 1. In recognition of the requirements of the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law, Md. Code be amended as follows: Ann., Bus. Reg. §§14-201-14-233, the Franchise Agreement for CITY PUBLICATIONS FRANCHISE GROUP, INC. shall ◼ Sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement require Franchisee to sign a general release as a condition of renewal and transfer of the franchise; such release shall exclude claims arising under the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law. ◼ Section 18B1.h of the Franchise Agreement which terminates the Franchise Agreement upon the bankruptcy of the Franchisee may not be enforceable under federal bankruptcy law (11 U.S.C. Section 101, et seq.). ◼ Section 24A of the Franchise Agreement requires that the franchise be governed by Georgia Law; however, in the event of a conflict of lawsto the extent required by the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law, Maryland law shall prevail. ◼ Sections 24B and 24G of the Franchise Agreement require litigation or arbitration to be conducted in the State of Georgia; the requirement shall not limit any rights Franchisee may have under the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law to bring suit in the State of Maryland. ◼ Any claims arising under the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law must be brought within three (3) years after the grant of the franchise. 2. 3. Each provision of this Amendment shall be effective only to the extent that the jurisdictional requirements of the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law applicable to the provisions are met independent of this Amendment. To the extent this addendum shall be deemed to be inconsistent with any terms or conditions of said Franchise Agreement or exhibits or attachments thereto, the terms of this addendum shall govern. Based on our financial condition, the Maryland Securities Commissioner has required a financial assurance. Therefore, all initial fees and payments owed by franchisees shall be deferred until we complete our pre-opening obligations under the franchise agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned hereby acknowledges having read this Amendment, and understands and consents to be bound by all of its terms. CITY PUBLICATIONS FRANCHISE GROUP, INC.:
FOR THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
| PUBLICATIONS FRANCHISE GROUP, INC. and to a solution of the Minnesota Franchise Law, Minn. Stat 80C.22, and the Rules and Regulations promulgated pursuant thereto by the Minnesota Rule 2860.4400, et. seq., the parties to the attached Franchise Agreement shall be ame franchises governed by Minnesota Law, the Franchisor versual Franchise Law which requires, except in certain specified can days notice of termination (with 60 days to cure) and 180 days notice of termination (with Franchise Agreement do not sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not section the section of the first three days are sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not section the first three days are sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not section three days are sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not section three days are sections as a section three days are sections as a section three days are sections as a section three days are sections as a section three days are sections as a section three days are sections as a section three days are sections as a section three days are section to the section three days are section to the section three days are section to the section three days are section three days are section to the section three days are section to the section three days are section to the section three days are section to the section three days are section to the section three days are section to the section three days are section to the section three days are section to the section three days are se | t., Chapter 80C, Sections 80C.01 through the Minnesota Commission of Securities, ment agree as follows: \nended to add that with respect to will comply with the Minnesota ses, that a Franchisee be given 90 days notice of non-renewal of the the provide for a prospective general to the Minnesota Franchise Law. |
|---|---|
|
ne Minnesota Commission of Securities, ment agree as follows: \nended to add that with respect to will comply with the Minnesota ses, that a Franchisee be given 90 lays notice of non-renewal of the trovide for a prospective general to the Minnesota Franchise Law. |
| franchises governed by Minnesota Law, the Franchisor version of Franchise Law which requires, except in certain specified can days notice of termination (with 60 days to cure) and 180 days regreement. Sections 5B.10 and 20B.2 of the Franchise Agreement do not | will comply with the Minnesota ses, that a Franchisee be given 90 lays notice of non-renewal of the provide for a prospective general to the Minnesota Franchise Law. to the Minnesota Franchise Law. |
| release of claims against Franchisor which may be subject Minn. Rule 2860.4400D prohibits a franchisor from requiring release. |
Source: Item 23 — RECEIPT (FDD pages 39–129)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
Based on the 2025 City Publications Franchise Disclosure Document, there is no specific addendum for Michigan that would directly impact the franchise agreement outside of Michigan. However, the FDD includes addenda for several other states like Maryland, California, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, and Virginia, which address how those states' laws modify the standard franchise agreement within those states. These addenda primarily concern franchise registration and disclosure laws, franchisee rights upon termination or non-renewal, enforceability of non-compete clauses, and venue for legal disputes.
For example, the Maryland addendum specifies that certain sections of the franchise agreement, such as those requiring a general release or mandating Georgia law, are superseded by Maryland law to the extent required by the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law. Similarly, the California addendum notes that the California Franchise Relations Act may supersede provisions in the franchise agreement related to termination or nonrenewal. The Rhode Island addendum states that any provision restricting jurisdiction or venue to a forum outside of Rhode Island is void with respect to a claim enforceable under The Rhode Island Franchise Investment Act.
While these state-specific addenda primarily affect franchisees operating within those states, they highlight a broader principle: franchise agreements are subject to state laws, and these laws can modify the terms of the agreement. The absence of a Michigan-specific addendum doesn't mean Michigan law is irrelevant. It simply suggests that no specific modifications to the standard agreement were deemed necessary for compliance in Michigan at the time of the FDD's issuance. A prospective franchisee in Michigan should still consult with legal counsel to understand how Michigan franchise laws might affect their agreement, even without an explicit addendum.
In summary, while the FDD does not contain information about Michigan law affecting the City Publications franchise agreement outside of Michigan, it is essential for a prospective franchisee to seek legal counsel to understand the implications of state laws on their franchise agreement.