Grand Rapids, Michigan (PRWEB) August 26, 2007
"Home town Davids are standing up to Goliath and winning in state and Federal Court rooms across the country," says D.J. Poyfair, attorney representing the plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit (Case 07-05194). Following a ruling in Michigan's Kent County 17th Circuit Court yesterday, (Case 07--CZ) Quixtar representatives expressed their satisfaction in the press and on their corporate blogs. "They even went so far as to assault the character of one of their former Independent Business Owners (IBOs) in an official corporate site posting," notes Poyfair.
What they aren't saying, however, is that the company came out on the other side of the same issue in courts all across the country. In fact, Business Wire reports that three Michigan Circuit Courts have granted Temporary Restraining Orders (TROs) against Quixtar on behalf of IBOs who are afraid of the corporate giant. Nationally, the picture for Quixtar was even worse. According to court records, TROs were granted to protect IBOs in five other states, and two of them in federal courts.
"We are concerned about retaliation," said Mike Gowen, one IBO among hundreds standing on the Kent County Courthouse steps during proceedings on Thursday, who won a TRO against Quixtar (Case 07-722348CK) . "Quixtar is coming after my personal business because they are being sued by several former high-level distributors that I am affiliated with." Mr. Gowen was referring to a case filed in California federal court two weeks ago, where several high level Quixtar business leaders filed a class action lawsuit (Case CV07-05194) alleging Quixtar is operating a pyramid scheme. In response to that filing, Quixtar terminated the 15 Plaintiffs. Their next move was to send threatening emails to every business owner demanding that they sign a pledge of allegiance to Quixtar or risk termination -- copy of this document is located on freetheibo.com. Carol Ralston, a single mother, another recipient of the email, who has built a successful business right in the Grand Rapids area, said, "How can they threaten to terminate me for something someone else supposedly did? I have worked hard to build my business and it's my sole source of income. What kind of a company treats people this way?"
About Business Owners et al. v. Quixtar, Inc. (Case 07-05194)
On August 9, 2007, a group including eight of the largest Quixtar distributors filed a lawsuit seeking to enjoin Quixtar from enforcing its distributor contracts, including the non-competition and non-solicitation provisions. The plaintiffs allege that the company knowingly operates as a pyramid scheme and prevents its distributors from leaving the organization through the aforementioned provisions. On August 10, 2007, the group sought a preliminary and permanent injunction restraining Quixtar from enforcing or attempting to enforce the non-competition and non-solicitation provisions. Hearings are set to begin on September 12, 2007.
More information regarding Quixtar, the lawsuits, including relevant court documents and timeline, is available at FreeTheIBO.com. Free The IBO was created as a source for information by Shughart, Thompson & Kilroy, firm representing the plaintiffs on the lawsuit, for those involved with the company and litigation, as well as for the media and general public alike.
# # #