factual

What motions did the defendants file in response to the Rockin'L Enterprises, LLC lawsuit against Crave?

Crave Franchise · 2025 FDD

Answer from 2025 FDD Document

Caption and Court Filing Date Summary of Proceeding
Rockin'L Enterprises, 03/22/2023 The proceeding claims fraud and unfair trade practices and seeks
LLC, Justin LaGrange, to vitiate the Franchise Agreement for error and fraud, vitiate the
and Heather LaGrange Securities and Purchase Agreement for the Shreveport location
vs.
Crave Franchising, LLC, for fraud, and declare the arbitration and choice of forum
Maritza Wulf, Karl F. provisions in the Franchise Agreement null and void.
Wulf, Karin Malkiewicz, Franchisees are seeking damages, penalties, attorneys' fees and
Karl S. Wulf, Larry costs under the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer
Gerson, and Salvatore Protection Act. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss or Stay the
Rincione; Docket No. Matters pending Arbitration and a Motion to Dismiss for
93,870-A, 10th Judicial Improper Venue. There has been no activity on the court dockets
District Court, for more than five months. Continued inactivity could result in a
Natchitoches Parish, dismissal by the defendants.
Louisiana

Source: Item 3 — LITIGATION (FDD pages 10–11)

What This Means (2025 FDD)

According to Crave's 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, in response to the lawsuit filed by Rockin'L Enterprises, LLC, the defendants filed two motions. These motions included a Motion to Dismiss or Stay the Matters pending Arbitration and a Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue.

The lawsuit brought by Rockin'L Enterprises, LLC, Justin LaGrange, and Heather LaGrange against Crave Franchising, LLC, Maritza Wulf, Karl F. Wulf, Karin Malkiewicz, Karl S. Wulf, Larry Gerson, and Salvatore Rincione alleges fraud and unfair trade practices. The plaintiffs are seeking to nullify the Franchise Agreement for error and fraud, invalidate the Securities and Purchase Agreement for the Shreveport location due to fraud, and declare the arbitration and choice of forum provisions in the Franchise Agreement null and void. Additionally, the franchisees are seeking damages, penalties, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act.

The document indicates that there has been no activity on the court dockets for more than five months, which could potentially lead to a dismissal by the defendants. This inactivity suggests a possible stall in the legal proceedings, which could be a point of concern or relief depending on a prospective franchisee's perspective and risk tolerance. It is important to note that legal proceedings can be costly and time-consuming, potentially impacting the franchisor's resources and reputation.

Disclaimer: This information is extracted from the 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document and is provided for research purposes only. It does not constitute legal or financial advice. Consult with a franchise attorney before making any investment decisions.