Does the Dog Haus addendum apply if the jurisdictional requirements of the Act are not met independently?

According to Dog Haus's 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, each provision within an addendum (specifically the Maryland, Rhode Island, and New York addenda) is only effective if the jurisdictional requirements of the relevant Act (Maryland law, Rhode Island Franchise Investment Act, or New York General Business Law) are met independently, without relying on the addendum itself. This means that the protections and stipulations outlined in the addendum only come into play if the franchisee's situation already falls under the jurisdiction of that state's franchise laws.

For a prospective Dog Haus franchisee, this condition is crucial. It implies that the addendum doesn't automatically grant rights or protections; instead, it clarifies how the franchise agreement interacts with state laws that already apply. If a franchisee's circumstances don't independently meet the jurisdictional requirements of the relevant state law, the addendum's provisions may not be enforceable.

This type of clause is common in franchise agreements to ensure compliance with varying state franchise laws. Franchisees should consult with a legal professional to determine whether their specific situation meets the jurisdictional requirements of the relevant state law and, consequently, whether the addendum's provisions will be effective in their case. Understanding this interplay between the franchise agreement and state law is essential for protecting their investment and rights as a franchisee.