Federal Judge Dismisses $1 Billion Lawsuit Filed By 52 Black Franchise Owners Against McDonald’s

Federal Judge Dismisses $1 Billion Lawsuit Filed By 52 Black Franchise Owners Against McDonald’s

McDonald’s, the mega fast-food chain with the golden arches, seems to be on the winning side of a legal battle against Black franchisees.

Last week, a federal judge in Chicago dismissed a lawsuit with 52 Black franchise owners filed against McDonald’s, claiming the fast-food chain directed the Black owners toward locations identified as low-income neighborhoods with high crime rates.

According to CNBC, McDonald’s has temporarily beat back the lawsuit by the Black franchise owners who claim the corporation ‘set them up for failure.’

The 2020 lawsuit was allegedly dismissed in a written order. Although the judge did not explain why he dropped the case, the plaintiffs were given until Oct. 21 to file an amended complaint.

The plaintiffs allegedly claim that McDonald’s proposed locations are not profitable and do not provide the Black franchisees with growth opportunities while working under the same terms as white franchise owners.

The restaurant chain is not offering successful options for the Black franchisees even with the restaurant chain’s public commitment to diversity and Black entrepreneurship. Reportedly, the plaintiffs are requesting up to $1 billion in damages.

McDonald’s has denied the claims and said franshisees make the ultimate decision on what areas they want to settle their store locations in, even though the restaurant chain does offer location recommendations.

Reuters reports that a spokesperson provided a statement regarding the lawsuit informing that the case was dismissed “because the plaintiffs had no facts to support their arguments.”

“Discrimination has no place at McDonald’s, and we remain steadfast in our dedication to taking action to attract and support franchisees who represent the diverse communities we serve,” the company said, according to the outlet.

Sources provide that lawyers for the plaintiffs did not respond to a request for comment.