In South Dakota, is any provision in the Crisp & Green franchise agreement and area development agreement restricting jurisdiction or venue to a forum outside of South Dakota void?

According to Crisp & Green's 2024 Franchise Disclosure Document, if a claim is enforceable under the South Dakota Franchise Act, any provision in the franchise agreement and area development agreement that restricts jurisdiction or venue to a forum outside of South Dakota, or requires the application of laws from another state, is considered void. This protection is specifically designed to ensure that South Dakota franchisees are not forced to litigate disputes in distant or inconvenient locations, or under laws that may be less favorable to them.

This provision is included as part of an addendum to the Franchise Disclosure Document specifically for potential Crisp & Green franchisees in South Dakota. The addendum acknowledges the requirements of the South Dakota Franchise Act, ensuring that the franchise offering complies with state law. This addendum is crucial for prospective franchisees in South Dakota as it modifies certain aspects of the standard franchise agreement to align with South Dakota's legal requirements.

In practical terms, this means that if a Crisp & Green franchisee in South Dakota has a dispute covered by the South Dakota Franchise Act, they generally have the right to pursue legal action within the state, under South Dakota law. This can save the franchisee significant costs and inconvenience associated with traveling to another state for legal proceedings and dealing with unfamiliar laws. However, it's important to note that this protection applies specifically to claims enforceable under the South Dakota Franchise Act, and other contractual matters may still be subject to the governing law of Minnesota, as stated in the franchise agreement.