HomeAboutContactOffice LocationLaw FormsSearchForm LLC Now

TestimonialsFree NewslettersSite MapSend Page to FriendOur Store

 

LLCsCorporationsReal EstateEstate PlanningLandlord LawAZ LawStatutes

Home
LLC Library
KEYTLaw Store
Attorneys & Staff
What's New
Table of Contents
Fixed Fee Services
Arizona Law
AZ Statutes
Corporation Library
Estate Plan Library
IRA Library
Law Forms Library
Articles Library
Probate FAQ
Real Estate Law
Landlord Tenant
Domain Name Law
Internet Law
Trademark Law
Copyright Law
Rick Keyt's Articles
Office Map
Contact Info
Inspirational Words
Flying the F-4
Law Office Tech
For Lawyer Authors
Stats of Interest
Get More Clients
Pages for Rent
Sample Page

You are here: Home  FTC Actions FTC Action Summaries Equinox Int'l Corp.

98.  FTC v. Equinox Int’l Corp. et al, Civil Action No. CV-S-99-0969-JBR-RLH (D. Nev. filed Aug. 3, 1999)

Defendants: Equinox International Corporation, Advanced Marketing Seminars, Inc., BG Enterprises, Inc., and William Gouldd

Type:  Pyramid Scheme, Health Products & False Advertising

Defendants allegedly operated a multi-level marketing company which offered distributorships for products including water filters, vitamins, nutritional supplements, and skin care products.  Equinox distributors ran classified ads in the "Help Wanted" sections of newspapers which implied that a salaried position was being offered. Persons who responded to the ads allegedly were given a sales presentation designed to recruit new distributors. Equinox also advertised and communicated with distributors through its Web site at www.equinoxinternational.com. This site contained several testimonials and information about distributorships, Equinox products and payout plans.

The FTC and 5 states filed a joint action on Aug. 3, 1999, alleging that the defendants operated a pyramid scheme, made false earnings claims, failed to disclose material information, and violated the FTC Act as well as state securities laws, deceptive trade practices laws, false advertising laws, pyramid laws, and licensing requirements. State co-plaintiffs were Hawaii, Maryland, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina - later joined by Tennessee, Michigan, and Virginia, with South Carolina dropping its suit. The Court granted the FTC and states’ request for an ex parte TRO and imposed a freeze on the defendants’ assets and a receivership over their business.

On Sept. 14, 1999, after a full hearing, the Court issued a modified preliminary injunction against the defendants. Pending a full trial, the Order prohibits any pyramid activity or misrepresentations about earnings. It requires defendants to modify their business terms and keeps a receiver in place to monitor defendants’ business and prevent the dissipation of assets.

Trial began April 3, 2000 and after the FTC and the states had presented their case, the parties reached a final settlement. The Court approved a provisional stipulated final judgment and order on April 20, 2000. The settlement bars Gouldd, for life, from engaging in any multi-level marketing operations. It also orders that cash and corporate and individual assets be placed in the hands of the court-appointed receiver for liquidation. The assets have an estimated liquidated value of $40 million to $50 million. Proceeds from the sale of assets will be used for consumer redress and payment of certain court-approved expenses, including the payment of states plaintiffs' fees and costs and fees and costs to defendants' and private class action plaintiffs' lawyers.

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1999/9908/equinox1.htm (press release - complaint / TRO)

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2000/04/equinox.htm (press release - settlement)

 

This page was last modified on July 22, 2007.

Send Page To a Friend

Subscribe to Richard Keyt's Free Email Newsletters

 

Privacy Policy | Disclaimers | Terms of Use | Suggestions  | Credit Card Security

Website Created by & Copyright ©  2001-2008 Richard Keyt, All Rights Reserved