Cal. Codes » Corporations Code / TITLE 4. SECURITIES / DIVISION 5. FRANCHISE INVESTMENT LAW / PART 2. REGULATION OF THE SALE OF FRANCHISES / CHAPTER 2. Disclosure
California Codes

Cal. Corporations Code § 31119 (2026)

Disclosure

✓ leginfo export of Sept. 26, 2026 (applied Oct. 1, 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)It is unlawful to sell any franchise in this state that is subject to registration under this law without first providing to the prospective franchisee, at least 14 days prior to the execution by the prospective franchisee of any binding franchise or other agreement, or at least 14 days prior to the receipt of any consideration, whichever occurs first, a copy of the franchise disclosure document, together with a copy of all proposed agreements relating to the sale of the franchise.

(b)Nothing in this division shall be construed to prevent a franchisor from providing copies of the franchise disclosure documents to prospective franchisees through electronic means pursuant to any requirements or conditions that may be imposed by rule or order of the commissioner.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1992–2024 · leading case: Connie A. Nagrampa v. Mailcoups, Inc. The Am. Arbitration Ass'n, 469 F.3d 1257 (9th Cir. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Connie A. Nagrampa v. Mailcoups, Inc. The Am. Arbitration Ass'n, 469 F.3d 1257 (9th Cir. 2006). “Cal. Corp.Code § 31119(a). The FIL prohibits franchisors from making material misrepresentations or omissions in the offer and sale of any franchise.”
California ex rel. California Corporations Comm'r v. Man Soo Yun (In Re Man Soo Yun), 476 B.R. 243 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2012). “Code § 31110 , (2) without providing prospective franchisees with UFOCs as required by Cal. Corp.Code § 31119, and (3) by means of written or oral communications containing untrue statements or omissions of material facts in violation of Cal.”
Dameshghi v. Texaco Refining & Mktg., Inc., 3 Cal. App. 4th 1262 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992). “Dameshghi’s complaint pleads several claims that Texaco failed to supply him with the documentation required under the Franchise Investment Law, such as a franchise offering circular (Corp. Code, § 31119), and documentation of an exemption from the franchise registration…”
Stocco v. Gemological Inst. of Am., Inc., 975 F. Supp. 2d 1170 (S.D. Cal. 2013). · cites it 6× “On July 10, 2012, Plaintiffs Frederick and Kathleen Stocco filed a First Amended Complaint, alleging the following claims for relief against GIA: (1) fraudulent misrepresentation; (2) negligence; (3) breach of written contract; (4) fraud in the inducement; (5) failure to provide…”
Handel's Enter., Inc. v. Schulenburg, 431 F. Supp. 3d 946 (N.D. Ohio 2020). · cites it 2× “) On December 3, 2018, the DBO found that Handel’s violated Cal. Corp. Code §§ 31119 and 31201, issued a citation against Handel’s, ordered Handel’s to desist and refrain from violating those sections, and assessed a $5,000 administrative penalty, plus the DBO’s attorney’s fees…”
Brian Nygaard v. Prop. Damage Appraisers, No. 18-15055 (9th Cir. Aug. 7, 2019). “Corp. Code § 31119 . In the instant case, the language was not provided to the parties in a pre-contract offering circular; rather, it was included in an addendum to the franchise agreement itself that was signed and executed on the same date as the franchise agreement.”
MRFranchise, Inc. v. P Stratford Ins. Co., 755 F. Supp. 3d 111 (D.N.H. 2024). “See Cal. Corp. Code § 31119 (a). Relevant here, in the MRF Disclosure, MRFranchise answered the question about prior litigation as follows: “No litigation is required to be disclosed .”
Nagrampa v. Mailcoups, Inc., No. 03-15955 (9th Cir. Dec. 4, 2006). “Cal. Corp. Code § 31119 (a). The FIL pro- 14 We may properly consider the franchise offering circular, which was attached as an exhibit to Nagrampa’s complaint and was admitted before the district court.”
Cal. Corporations Code § 31119(a): 2 cases
Connie A. Nagrampa v. Mailcoups, Inc. The Am. Arbitration Ass'n, 469 F.3d 1257 (9th Cir. 2006). “Cal. Corp.Code § 31119(a). The FIL prohibits franchisors from making material misrepresentations or omissions in the offer and sale of any franchise.”
Stocco v. Gemological Inst. of Am., Inc., 975 F. Supp. 2d 1170 (S.D. Cal. 2013). “On July 10, 2012, Plaintiffs Frederick and Kathleen Stocco filed a First Amended Complaint, alleging the following claims for relief against GIA: (1) fraudulent misrepresentation; (2) negligence; (3) breach of written contract; (4) fraud in the inducement; (5) failure to provide…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.