IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ADA. Case No.

Similar documents
Case 1:16-cv BLW Document 1 Filed 06/22/16 Page 1 of 11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

Courthouse News Service

Filing Fee: $88.00 Category: A

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT. KAYAK Software Corporation, by its attorneys, Foley & Lardner LLP, for its Complaint

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA INDICTMENT INTRODUCTION. 1. Defendant DENNIS EARL HECKER, a resident of Minnesota,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION. Defendant. JURY DEMANDED PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION

Case 2:13-cv RJS-EJF Document 2 Filed 08/27/13 Page 1 of 21

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE EASTERN DISTRICT

Ms. Carragher breached their contract to relocate him in rental property or were

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Best Hole in One Club Member ( Rules and Regulations )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) I. PARTIES

2018 BREEDING CONTRACT QH SERENGETI

DC CAUSE NO.

Courtesy of

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-CV-04489

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE RELIEF. Plaintiff, Defendants. I INTRODUCTION

3R RANCH OUTFITTERS, LLC 2016 HUNTING AGREEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

CASE NO. COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Picheny Equestrian Enterprises, Inc. ("Picheny"), as and for its

Case 2:15-cv NBF Document 29 Filed 06/04/15 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 4:15-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 11/12/15 Page 1 of 12

2018 BREEDING CONTRACT NUTCRACKER S NIRVANA

Case 4:13-cv KES Document 1 Filed 05/10/13 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

For mutual consideration received, which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

TASCOSA GOLF CLUB MEMBERSHIP PLAN

TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AUSTRALIAN CRICKET FAMILY (ACF) AND ACF GOLD PRIORITY TICKET ACCESS PERIODS FOR THE 2017/18 PERTH ASHES TEST

Case 2:13-cv LKK-CKD Document 1 Filed 11/26/13 Page 1 of 14

Case: 3:14-cv DAK Doc #: 1 Filed: 04/14/14 1 of 13. PageID #: 1

Terms and Conditions of Priority Ticket Offer 2013/14

CLEVELAND INDIANS GROUP TICKET SALES AGREEMENT

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR WILSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

United States Figure Skating Association Eligible Skater s Compensation Agreement Program (ESCA)

PHOTOGRAPHY SUBMISSION GUIDELINES FOR YEAR 2014 CALENDARS. August 3, 2012

Appendix A Canadian Football League Standard Player Contract

Case Doc 1 Filed 10/06/09 Entered 10/06/09 18:33:53 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 11

For such purposes, UEFA intends to organise a tendering process ( Tender ).

Host League. Website Complete Address INTERLEAGUE BOUTING AGREEMENT

ITEM No. 20 g MOTION. PRESENTED BY: HERJLJ. WESSONyJr. Councilman, 10th District SECONDED BY

Driftwood Outfitters 1851 Grassy-Narrow C.P. 60, Moffet, Québec JOZ2W0

Enabling Legislation New York Thoroughbred Breeding and Development Fund

SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT BETWEEN THE GEORGIA TECH ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION AND COACH PAUL JOHNSON

CHURCHILL DOWNS INCORPORATED FOUNDATION Official Rules

ROJO ARABIANS BREEDING CONTRACT

USA Water Ski Event Sanction Agreement

Case 1:18-cv UA Document 1 Filed 02/14/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK INTRODUCTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Wiloma Plantation, Inc Breeding Contract

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

Case: 2:15-cv WOB-JGW Doc #: 1 Filed: 12/28/15 Page: 1 of 10 - Page ID#: 1

Each tournament s fi nancial commitment is composed of on-site prize money and tournament fee obligations unless otherwise approved by ATP.

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

Invitation to Express Interest (ITEI) Heavy Machinery Services

MCC Cricket Academy Terms And Conditions For The Hire Of Nets

Championship Futurity Tour 2014 Rules and Regulations

FIELD USE AGREEMENT. DATE: This Agreement is made on the day of, 2016.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NO.

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICAL DISTRICT AT ANCHORAGE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

HORSE BOARDING AGREEMENT

Invitation to express interest UEFA Club Competitions Accommodation Agency - Cycle

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Arrowhead Lake Association Boat Registration Rules

COLORADO LOTTERY MULTI-STATE JACKPOT GAME, LUCKY FOR LIFE

FISHHAWK TENNIS CENTER RECREATION PROGRAM AND AMENITY MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT {Discussion Draft November 7, 2018} This Fishhawk Tennis Center Recreation

smb Doc 217 Filed 01/08/19 Entered 01/08/19 11:54:14 Main Document Pg 1 of 9

Joan Logan Schroeder Kiowa Ranch 8876 FM 902 Collinsville, TX Joan s Cell

USA SOFTBALL OF COLORADO

SINGAPORE edevelopment LIMITED (Incorporated in Singapore) (Company Registration No W)

Case 1:15-cv GLR Document 29 Filed 03/08/17 Page 1 of 24. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND (Baltimore Division)

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 11/29/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UEFA EURO Technical Services & Overlay / Tender Process. Supplier for Temporary TV Broadcasting Power Phase 1 - Invitation to Express Interest

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-CI- DIVISION Electronically Filed

Invitation to express interest

APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP AT MIRAGE COUNTRY CLUB PORT DOUGLAS.

GENERAL BUSINESS TERMS AND CONDITIONS General Business Terms and Conditions relating to the Services of the Ski School Lech GmbH & Co KG

COMPLAINT FOR DESIGN PATENT INFRINGEMENT AND UNFAIR AND DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY WARREN CIRCUIT COURT CIVIL ACTION NO. LAVONDA JOHNSON, GREG JOHNSON AND JALYN SAVAGE

UEFA EURO Media Services & Operations / Tender Process

WBO FEMALE REGULATIONS OF WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP CONTESTS

IOWA LOTTERY GAME SPECIFIC RULES LOTTO AMERICA SM

Case 1:17-cv APM Document 1 Filed 09/27/17 Page 1 of 18. United States District Court District of Columbia

Case 2:16-cv J Document 1 Filed 02/23/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1

North Farm Sousa Street North Lawrence, Ohio

CHAMPIONSHIP BULL RIDING, INC. CBR Bull Team Challenge Agreement and Rules & Regulations

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT, LAW DIVISION

Contractor Compensation and Agreement Overview

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, Christopher Leong, individually and on behalf of himself and all others

(a) The Breeder may not assign or transfer this Agreement or any interest in this Agreement. 2. STALLION.

PUBLIC SERVICE ~ O~~ISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON

DISPUTE RESOLUTION COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE

Transcription:

Electronically Filed 10/3/2017 2:35 PM Fourth Judicial District, Ada County Christopher D. Rich, Clerk of the Court By: Rose Wright, Deputy Clerk Terri Pickens Manweiler/ISB #5828 Shannon N. Pearson/ISB #10027 PICKENS COZAKOS, P.A. 398 S. 9 th Street, Ste. 240 P.O. Box 915 Boise, ID 83701 Telephone: (208) 954-5090 Facsimile: (208) 954-5099 terri@pickenslawboise.com shannon@pickenslawboise.com Attorneys for Plaintiff IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ADA ERGOGENIX, INC., a Delaware corporation, Case No. CV01-17-18298 vs. Plaintiff, BODYBUILDING.COM, LLC an Idaho limited liability company, COMPLAINT Defendant. COMES NOW Plaintiff Ergogenix, Inc., a Delaware corporation, by and through its attorney of record, Terri Pickens Manweiler of the firm Pickens Cozakos, P.A., hereby submits this Complaint against the above-captioned Defendant Bodybuilding.com, LLC, an Idaho limited liability company, as follows: JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. This Court has jurisdiction over all claims asserted herein pursuant to I.C. 5-216, I.C. 5-217, I.C. 5-514(a) and other provisions of Idaho law. 2. Venue is proper pursuant to I.C. 5-404. COMPLAINT -1

3. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties pursuant to Idaho Code 5-514, as all parties have transacted business in the state of Idaho. 4. The amount in controversy exceeds the minimum jurisdictional requirements of this Court. PARTIES 5. Plaintiff Ergogenix Inc. ( Ergogenix ) is a Delaware corporation in good standing and duly authorized to conduct business in Ada County, State of Idaho, who entered into a contract, governed by the laws of the State of Idaho, as more fully set forth below. 6. Defendant Bodybuilding.com, LLC ( Bodybuilding.com ) is an Idaho limited liability company in good standing and duly authorized to conduct business in Ada County, State of Idaho. BACKGROUND ALLEGATIONS 7. Ergogenix is in the business of manufacturing and producing nutritional supplements and products. 8. Bodybuilding.com is in the business of purchasing, marketing, and reselling nutritional supplements and products. 9. In or around September 2014, Bodybuilding.com approached Ergogenix with a marketing proposal that would cause Ergogenix product sales to grow exponentially. 10. Based on discussions with Bodybuilding.com, Ergogenix provided Bodybuilding.com its projected sales for 2015, which were $5.0 million. 11. Bodybuilding.com reviewed and accepted Ergogenix s projections and based its expected growth revenue off the 2015 projected sales and promised Ergogenix a minimum growth of 50% for the next four years. COMPLAINT -2

12. On or about December 23, 2014, Ergogenix and Bodybuilding.com entered into a Marketing Promotion and Sales Agreement ( Agreement ). A true and accurate copy of the Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 13. The Agreement contains an integration clause and incorporates and encompasses all contractual terms between Ergogenix and Bodybuilding.com. 14. The Agreement provided that Bodybuilding.com would purchase Ergogenix s products at a wholesale rate, then market and resell those products through its online marketing sales system. 15. Upon delivery of the products to Bodybuilding.com, Bodybuilding.com became the owner of those products. 16. Bodybuilding.com would pay Ergogenix for the products within thirty (30) days from the date of invoice or receipt and acceptance of the product from Ergogenix. 17. The Agreement also included an Equity Issuance Agreement, whereby in exchange for twenty percent (20%) ownership interest in Ergogenix, Bodybulding.com promised and agreed to market and promote Ergogenix products and promised a sales projection of $5,000,000 and a minimum growth of fifty percent (50%) in revenue for the next four years. 18. Bodybuilding.com did not pay any out of pocket capital contributions for the twenty percent (20%) ownership interest in Ergogenix. 19. After entering into the Agreement, Bodybuilding.com had exclusive control over all marketing and promotion for Ergogenix products. 20. Per the arrangement with Bodybuilding.com, Ergogenix could not use a third party to market or promote its products and relied solely on Bodybuilding.com. COMPLAINT -3

21. Shortly after entering into the Agreement, it became apparent to Ergogenix that Bodybuilding.com s sole marketing strategy was to offer extremely aggressive promotions or deep discounts, which was not disclosed to Ergogenix prior to entering into the Agreement. 22. Bodybuilding.com was aware of Ergogenix concerns regarding the lack of marketing and promised new or different marketing strategies to increase revenue and sales. 23. Bodybuilding.com s new or different marketing strategies never came to fruition and as a result, Ergogenix did not realize a profit within the first year of signing the Agreement as had been promised by Bodybuilding.com. 24. Bodybuilding.com began significantly discounting Ergogenix s products and demanded that Ergogenix repay Bodybuilding.com for the discounts. 25. Bodybuilding.com submitted demands for Ergogenix to pay discounts in excess of $540,000. 26. Ergogenix did not realize a profit after entering into the Agreement, in fact Ergogenix lost several hundred thousand dollars as a result of entering into the Agreement. 27. The projected revenues under the Agreement were not being met and Ergogenix was losing revenue because of Bodybuilding.com s failed marketing attempts, as such, eighteen (18) months after entering into the Agreement, Bodybuilding.com agreed to waive the exclusivity requirement, allowing Ergogenix to use third parties to market and promote its products. 28. Ergogenix never realized the projected growth and revenue as promised by Bodybuilding.com. COMPLAINT -4

29. Ergogenix has had to expend nearly double its budgeted marketing and promotion expense to its third-party marketers because of Bodybuilding.com s failure to properly market and promote Ergogenix s products. COUNT 1 FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT 30. All prior allegations are incorporated herein by reference as though restated in their entirety. 31. Bodbuilding.com made a representation to Ergogenix that it had an enormous marketing reach and could use that marketing reach to grow Ergogenix projected sales for 2015 by $5,000,000 and cause a fifty percent (50%) growth in subsequent years. 32. Bodybuilding.com s representation to Ergogenix was materially false. 33. Bodybuilding.com s representation was important to Ergogenix as it was the reason Ergogenix entered into the Agreement. 34. Ergogenix was reasonable to rely on Bodybuilding.com s representations. 35. Bodybuilding.com acted with reckless disregard in making the representation to Ergogenix because it did not do its due diligence or research on Ergogenix s sales projection of $5.0 million prior to promising Ergogenix $5,000,000 in 2015 projected revenue and a fifty percent (50%) growth in subsequent years until after the Agreement was signed by both parties. 36. Ergogenix did not know that Bodybuilding.com could not live up to its representation that it would increase revenue by $5,000,000 for 2015 and cause a fifty percent (50%) growth in subsequent years. 37. Bodybulding.com intended Ergogenix to rely on its representation as referenced by both parties entering into the Agreement, Bodybuilding.com becoming a twenty percent COMPLAINT -5

(20%) owner of Ergogenix, and Bodybuilding.com s exclusivity requirement that Ergogenix could not use any other party to market and promote its products. 38. Ergogenix relied on Bodybuilding.com s representation of projected growth revenue and entered into the Agreement because of its reliance on Bodybuilding.com s representation. 39. Ergogenix s reliance on Bodybuilding.com s representation was justified because Ergogenix provided its projected revenue for 2015 to Bodybuilding.com and Bodybuilding.com based its growth projection of $5,000,000 in 2015 and fifty percent (50%) for subsequent years on this information provided by Ergogenix. 40. As a result of Ergogenix s reliance on Bodybuilding.com s representations, it has lost significant revenue and has had to pay more in marketing and promotion to third parties since it entered into the Agreement. 41. As a result of Bodybuilding.com s fraudulent inducement, Ergogenix has been damaged in an amount in excess of $10,000, an amount to be proven at trial. COUNT 2 CANCELLATION OF SHARES 42. All prior allegations are incorporated herein by reference as though restated in their entirety. 43. As a result of Bodybuilding.com s wrongful conduct, Bodybuilding.com should not be entitled to benefit from an ownership interest in Ergogenix. 44. Bodybuilding.com s twenty-percent (20%) interest in Ergogenix should be cancelled. 45. Ergogenix hereby requests a court ordered cancellation of Bodybuilding s twenty percent (20%) share in Ergogenix. COMPLAINT -6

46. Ergogenix believes good cause exists to seek a court ordered cancellation of Bodybuilding.com s minority shares in Ergogenix. COUNT 3 BREACH OF CONTRACT 47. All prior allegations are incorporated herein by reference as though restated in their entirety. 48. Ergogenix and Bodybuilding.com entered into a Marketing, Promotion and Sales Agreement on December 23, 2014. 49. Bodybuilding.com agreed to purchase Ergogenix s products for resale through its online distribution system. 50. Bodybuilding.com further promised to market and promote Ergogenix products and in exchange, Ergogenix provided Bodybuilding.com twenty percent (20%) share in Ergogenix. 51. The Agreement contains an integration clause which provides that the Agreement and its exhibits constitute the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior agreements. 52. Bodybuilding.com failed to properly market Ergogenix s products, and it began selling the products at a large discount. 53. Bobybuilding.com then began charging Ergogenix for the discounts, despite any contractual provision allowing Bodybuilding.com to make such charge backs. 54. Bodybuilding.com breached the Agreement by making a demand on Ergogenix to remit payment in the amount of $540,161.14. COMPLAINT -7

55. The Agreement does not require Ergogenix to remit payment to Bodybuilding.com and because of the integration clause, Bodybuilding.com cannot now claim Ergogenix owes it money pursuant to the Agreement. 56. Bodybuilding.com has also breached the Agreement because it failed to adequately market and promote Ergogenix products as required by the Agreement. 57. As a result of Bodybuilding.com s breach of the Agreement, Ergogenix has been damaged in an amount in excess of $10,000, an amount to be proven at trial. ATTORNEY S FEES 58. Ergogenix is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney fees against Bodybuilding.com in accordance with I.C. 12-120(3), 12-121, the terms of the Agreement, and other provisions of Idaho law. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Ergogenix, Inc. demands judgment as follows: 1. That judgment be entered against Bodybuilding.com and in favor of Ergogenix for the amount of damages sustained by Ergogenix as a result of Bodybuilding.com s breach of contract in an amount in excess of $10,000.00; 2. That judgment be entered against Bodybuilding.com and in favor of Ergogenix for the amount of damages sustained by Ergogenix as a result of Bodybuilding.com s fraudulent inducement in an amount in excess of $10,000.00; 3. A Court ordered cancellation of Bodybuilding.com s shares in Ergogenix; 4. That judgment be entered in favor of Ergogenix on all other claims for relief against Bodybuilding.com as stated herein; 5. An award of reasonable attorney s fees and costs for prosecuting this action; and COMPLAINT -8

6. For such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper. DATED: October 3, 2017. PICKENS COZAKOS, P.A. By: /s/ Terri Pickens Manweiler Terri Pickens Manweiler, Of the Firm Attorneys for Plaintiff COMPLAINT -9