Former ‘RHOA’ Star Dennis McKinley Reaches Settlement In Lawsuit Accusing The Original Hot Dog Factory Of Fraudulent Business Practices


Former ‘RHOA’ Star Dennis McKinley Reaches Settlement In Lawsuit Accusing The Original Hot Dog Factory Of Fraudulent Business Practices

It looks like Dennis McKinley isn’t in “hot dog” water anymore.

According to RadarOnline, the former ‘Real Housewives of Atlanta’ castmate is no longer battling it out in court over his ex-business, The Original Hot Dog Factory.

Dennis McKinley

If you didn’t know, Dennis McKinley sold The Original Hot Dog Factory, founded in 201o, to husband-and-wife restaurant group Ismael and Charity Ramos in October.

In the same month, a woman named Dezaree Lusk dismissed her year-long lawsuit against McKinley after both parties negotiated a satisfactory deal.

Reportedly, the plaintiff, Dezaree Lusk, filed her case in November 2022 after claiming that the Bravo star (seemingly) failed to meet the agreements within her contract to franchise the popular restaurant.

Allegedly, Dezaree Lusk coughed up a whopping $30,000 to buy into the renowned entrepreneur’s then-company. McKinley was supposedly obligated to offer “resources” to get it up and running, which is what the payment was for.

Court documents read,

“An estimated six months lapsed and [McKinley’s] company failed to provide the resources in which to build the franchise.”

Dennis McKinley w/ ex, ‘RHOA’ star Porsha Williams (now Guobadia) and their daughter, Pilar (circa 2019)

Upon first bringing the situation to McKinley, he originally said that he would cooperate with issuing a refund to Lusk, but he didn’t, which later led to McKinley being slapped with arbitration and a fraud accusation.

Ultimately, Lusk was awarded $32,000, but unfortunately… McKinley didn’t adhere to the guidelines, prompting her to follow through with suing in demand of her coins and a court-appointed receiver.

The filings said,

“Based on the actions of [McKinley] towards [Lusk], there is substantive belief that [McKinley] will dispose of the monies owed to [Lusk] and remove [McKinley’s] ability to pay [Lusk] if the monies owed to [Lusk] are not held by a receiver until the final adjudication on the merits.”

Thankfully, each individual has found a middle ground on the matter at hand.

Let’s just hope Mr. McKinley won’t have to see a judge for a while.

What are your thoughts? Share the below!

[VIA]


Read The Original Article Here