Commitments and Contingencies

12 Months Ended

Sep. 27, 2022

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

5. Commitments and Contingencies:

As of September 27, 2022, the Company had approximately $204,000 in outstanding commitments related to the manufacturing and installation of new signage related to certain existing Good Times restaurants.  

There may be various claims in process, matters in litigation, and other contingencies brought against the company by employees, vendors, customers, franchisees, or other parties. Evaluating these contingencies is a complex process that may involve substantial judgment on the potential outcome of such matters, and the ultimate outcome of such contingencies may differ from our current analysis. We regularly review the adequacy of accruals and disclosures related to such contingent liabilities in consultation with legal counsel. While it is not possible to predict the outcome of these claims with certainty, it is management’s opinion that any reasonably possible losses associated with such contingencies would be immaterial to our financial statements.  

The Company is the defendant in a lawsuit styled as White Winston Select Asset Funds, LLC and GT Acquisition Group, Inc. v. Good Times Restaurants, Inc., arising from the failed negotiations between plaintiffs and the Company for the sale of the Good Times Drive Thru subsidiary to plaintiffs. The lawsuit was initially filed on September 24, 2019 in Delaware Chancery Court, and Company removed the case to federal court in the US District Court for the District of Delaware on November 5, 2019. On July 30, 2021, the plaintiffs moved the Court for leave to amend their complaint and add new causes of action and a claim for $18 million in damages. On April 11, 2022, the Court heard the parties’ respective motions for summary judgment on the plaintiffs’ claims. The Court verbally ruled that it was dismissing all of the plaintiffs’ claims except for their claim for breach of an express and implied obligation to negotiate in good faith under the parties’ letter of intent. On May 5, 2022, the Court issued a written order confirming this ruling. On May 25, 2022, the Court issued an order that the plaintiffs are only entitled to reliance damages should they prevail on their claim for breaches of the express and implied obligations to negotiate in good faith. The parties conducted a bench trial on the plaintiffs’ claims. The parties concluded post-judgment briefing on October 24, 2022. The Court’s judgment on the plaintiffs’ claims is forthcoming.