What is amended in Section 13.2 of the Monicals Pizza Area Development Agreement regarding litigation for Monicals Pizza?
Monicals_Pizza Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
| between Monical Pizza Corporation and | This Addendum to the Area Development Agreement is agreed to this day of, 20, by and | |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | In recognition of the requirements of The Rhode Island Franchise Investment Act §19-28.1-14 the | |
| Law: | following provision contained in the Area Development Agreement is amended to be consistent with Rhode Island | |
| | under this Act. | Sections 13.1 and 13.2 of the Area Development Agreement are amended to provide that restricting jurisdiction or venue to a forum outside the state of Rhode Island or requiring the application of the laws of another state is void with respect to a claim otherwise enforceable |
| 2. | Agreement or exhibits or attachments thereto, the terms of this Addendum shall govern. | Each provision of this Addendum shall be effective only to the extent that the jurisdictional requirements of the Rhode Island Law applicable to the provisions are met independently of this Addendum. To the extent this Addendum shall be deemed to be inconsistent with any terms or conditions of said Area Development |
| understands and consents to be bound by all of its terms. |
Source: Item 23 — RECEIPTS (FDD pages 46–257)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to the 2025 Monicals Pizza FDD, Section 13.2 of the Area Development Agreement is amended in certain states to address specific legal requirements regarding where litigation can occur. For developers in Rhode Island, Sections 13.1 and 13.2 are amended to ensure that any clauses restricting jurisdiction or venue to a location outside of Rhode Island, or requiring the application of another state's laws, are void if they conflict with Rhode Island law. Similarly, for developers in Washington, Sections 13.2 and 13.7 are amended to ensure that the requirement for litigation or arbitration to occur in Illinois does not limit the developer's rights under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act to bring a suit in Washington.
In Indiana, Section 13.2 is amended to explicitly allow the developer to start litigation in Indiana for any cause of action under Indiana law. For California, the Area Development Agreement may require litigation to be conducted in a court located outside of the State of California, but this provision might not be enforceable for any cause of action arising under California law.
These amendments provide clarity and protection for Monicals Pizza developers by ensuring that their rights to litigate or arbitrate within their own state, and under their own state's laws, are preserved, despite any potentially conflicting clauses in the standard Area Development Agreement. This is particularly important because franchise agreements often contain clauses specifying a particular jurisdiction for dispute resolution, which can be burdensome for franchisees if it is far from their location.