What specific actions did the plaintiffs in the Calabrese case allege Remax took regarding the renewal of franchise agreements?
Remax Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
On April 10, 2018, former RE/MAX franchise owners Salvatore Calabrese and Michael Calabrese and former franchisee Related Assets LLC d/b/a RE/MAX Metro filed suit against RE/MAX, LLC RE/MAX of New York, Inc. and others relating to the refusal to renew/termination of their three franchise agreements. Plaintiffs allege, among other things, that RE/MAX, LLC and/or RE/MAX of New York Inc. improperly: refused to recognize an alleged verbal agreement to renew the franchise agreements; required Plaintiffs to renew on the then-current form of franchise agreement with allegedly less favorable terms; refused to allow Plaintiffs to renew their existing form of franchise agreement; and solicited, and subsequently granted competing franchise locations to, certain of the sales agents who had been associated with Plaintiffs in an alleged effort to secure certain of Plaintiffs' business despite alleged non-compete agreements of those sales agents.
Source: Item 3 — LITIGATION (FDD pages 21–29)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to the 2025 Remax Franchise Disclosure Document, the Calabrese case involved allegations regarding the renewal of franchise agreements. The plaintiffs, Salvatore Calabrese, Michael Calabrese, and Related Assets LLC, claimed that Remax improperly handled their franchise agreement renewals.
Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that Remax refused to acknowledge a verbal agreement to renew their franchise agreements. They also claimed that Remax required them to renew under the then-current franchise agreement terms, which the plaintiffs believed were less favorable than their existing agreements. Furthermore, Remax allegedly refused to allow the plaintiffs to renew their franchise agreements under the existing terms.
In addition to these issues, the plaintiffs also asserted that Remax solicited and granted competing franchise locations to sales agents who had previously worked with the plaintiffs. This was allegedly done to secure the plaintiffs' business, despite the existence of non-compete agreements with those sales agents. These allegations formed the basis of the lawsuit against Remax, involving claims of breach of contract, bad faith, and other related issues.