In what court was the lawsuit against Floyds 99 Franchising, LLC filed?
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, a lawsuit was filed against Floyds 99 Franchising, LLC in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego. The case, titled Matthew Chavez and Nicole Deis v. Roise Barbers, Inc., Jonathan M. Roise, Floyd's 99 Holdings, LLC and Floyd's 99 Franchising, LLC, was filed on November 6, 2020, with the case number No. 37-2020-00040793-CU-OE-CTL.
The plaintiffs, former employees of a Floyds 99 franchisee (Roise Barbers, Inc.), alleged employment and labor violations under California law. They claimed that Floyds 99 Franchising, LLC was liable as a joint employer or co-employer with the franchisee. Floyds 99 Holdings, LLC was initially named in the suit but was later dismissed without prejudice on June 14, 2023.
To avoid further legal costs, Floyds 99 Franchising, LLC paid $2,500 as part of a settlement with the defendants on September 6, 2024. Subsequently, all parties entered into a Settlement and Release Agreement, and the court dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice on December 12, 2024. This means the case was resolved without a judgment against Floyds 99 Franchising, LLC, but it highlights the potential for franchisees' employment practices to create legal exposure for the franchisor.