Does the Cordova franchise agreement preclude litigation?

According to the 2025 Cordova Franchise Disclosure Document, whether the franchise agreement precludes litigation depends on the state in which the franchise is purchased. For instance, the Washington Franchise Agreement Amendment states that if litigation is not precluded by the franchise agreement, a franchisee may bring an action in Washington arising out of the sale of franchises or a violation of the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act.

For franchisees in Maryland, the FDD states that a franchisee may bring a lawsuit in Maryland for claims arising under the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law. The Maryland amendment also addresses dispute resolution through arbitration, noting a potential conflict between the franchise agreement's arbitration requirement and Maryland law, which deems it unfair to require a franchisee to waive their right to file a lawsuit in Maryland claiming a violation of the Maryland Franchise Law.

Similarly, the Illinois Franchise Agreement Amendment specifies that Illinois law governs the agreements between the parties and that any provision designating jurisdiction or venue outside of Illinois is void, although the agreement may still provide for arbitration outside of Illinois. The New York Franchise Agreement Amendment states that nothing in the agreement should be considered a waiver of any right conferred upon franchisee by New York General Business Law, Sections 680-695.