What was the basis for the claim against Floyds 99 Franchising, LLC in the lawsuit?
Floyds_99 Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
lution/Columbia Care) in Denver, Colorado.
ITEM 3. LITIGATION
Matthew Chavez and Nicole Deis v. Roise Barbers, Inc., Jonathan M. Roise, Floyd's 99 Holdings, LLC and Floyd's 99 Franchising, LLC, No. 37-2020-00040793-CU-OE-CTL (Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego, filed November 6, 2020). On March 27, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Class Action Complaint to add Floyd's 99 Holdings, LLC and Floyd's 99 Franchising, LLC as defendants to the lawsuit previously filed against Roise Barbers, Inc., a FLOYD'S 99 franchisee,
and Jonathan Roise. Plaintiffs are former employees of Roise Barbers, Inc., and sought damages, relief and restitution under California law for alleged employment and labor violations. Plaintiffs alleged that Floyd's 99 Franchising, LLC was liable as a joint employer or co-employer with Roise Barbers, Inc. On June 14, 2023, Floyd's 99 Holdings, LLC was removed from the litigation when it was dismissed without prejudice. On September 6, 2024, Floyd's 99 Franchising, LLC paid $2,500 as part of a larger settlement with Defendants in order to avoid additional attorneys' fees and all parties entered into a Settlement and Release Agreement. On Dec
Source: Item 3 — LITIGATION (FDD pages 13–14)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to the 2025 Floyds 99 Franchise Disclosure Document, Floyds 99 Franchising, LLC was added as a defendant to a lawsuit on March 27, 2023. The original lawsuit was against Roise Barbers, Inc., a Floyds 99 franchisee, and Jonathan Roise. The plaintiffs, Matthew Chavez and Nicole Deis, were former employees of Roise Barbers, Inc. They sought damages, relief, and restitution under California law for alleged employment and labor violations.
The claim against Floyds 99 Franchising, LLC was that they were liable as a joint employer or co-employer with Roise Barbers, Inc. Floyds 99 Holdings, LLC was initially included in the suit but was later dismissed without prejudice on June 14, 2023. To avoid additional attorney's fees, Floyds 99 Franchising, LLC paid $2,500 as part of a larger settlement with the defendants on September 6, 2024.
Ultimately, on December 12, 2024, the court dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice after all parties entered into a Settlement and Release Agreement. This means the case was resolved without a determination of guilt or liability, and the plaintiffs could potentially bring the same claim again in the future, although this is unlikely given the settlement agreement.