Amway: The Untold Story: P&G Lawsuit (Texas)

 

The Procter & Gamble Company              :

One Procter & Gamble Plaza                :

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202,                   :



and                                       :



The Procter & Gamble Distributing         :

Company                                   :

One Procter & Gamble Plaza                :

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202,                   :



           Plaintiffs,                    :



    -vs-                                  :



Amway Corporation                         :

7575 East Fulton Street                   :

Ada, Michigan 49355,                      :



and                                       :



The Amway Distributors Association        :

Council                                   :

7575 East Fulton Street                   :

Ada, Michigan 49355,                      :

and                                       :



Ja-Ri Corporation                         :

7575 East Fulton Street                   :

Ada, Michigan 49355,                      :



and                                       :



Donald R. Wilson                          :

1190 E. 5425S                             :

Ogden, Utah 84403,                        :



and                                       :



WOW International Inc.                    :

9190 E. 5425S                             :

Ogden, Utah 84403,                        :



and                                       :

Wilson Enterprises, Inc.                  :

1190 E. 5425S                             :

Ogden, Utah 84403,                        :



and                                       :



Ronald A. Rummel, Individually, and       :

d/b/a Rummel Enterprises                  :

11875 Forestgate Drive                    :  

Dallas, Texas 75243,                      :



and                                       :



Roger D. Patton                           :

40818 Pipestone                           :

Magnolia, Texas 77355,                    :



and                                       :



Jeffrey G. Musgrove, Individually, and    :

d/b/a Musgrove Enterprises                :

6110 Plantation Bay Drive                 :

Katy, Texas 77449,                        :



and                                       :



Kevin Shinn                               :

County Road 1083                          :

Greenville, Texas 75401,                  :



and                                       :



Randy Haugen                              :

2488 Bonneville Terrace                   :

Ogden, Utah 84403,                        :



and                                       :



Freedom Associates, Inc.                  :

2488 Bonneville Terrace                   :

Ogden, Utah 84403,                        :



and                                       :



Freedom Tools, Inc.                       :

2488 Bonneville Terrace                   :

Ogden, Utah 84403,                        :



and                                       :

Randy Walker                              :

17688 Kuykendahl Road                     :

Spring, Texas 77379,                      :



and                                       :



Walker International Network              :

1450 (Interstate 45 S #F-13               :

Conroe, Texas 77304,                      :



and                                       :



Gene Shaw                                 :

Box 131                                   :

Whiteright, Texas 75491,                  :



and                                       :



Robert Schmanski, Individually, and       :

d/b/a Schmanski Enterprises               :

17167 Beaver Springs                      :

Houston, Texas 77090,                     :



and                                       :



Mark Pruitt                               :

1607 Sweet Grass Trail                    :

Houston, Texas 77090,                     :



and                                       :



William Bredemeyer                        :

722 Sheldon Road                          :

Channelview, Texas 77530,                 :



and                                       :



John and Jane Does, 1-5, Individuals,     :



and                                       :



John and Jane Does, 6-10, Business        :

Entities,                                 :



        Defendants.                       :
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES
The Procter & Gamble Company and the Procter & Gamble Distributing Company

(collectively "Procter & Gamble" or "Plaintiffs"), for their complaint in 

this action, state as follows:
I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. The matter in controversy exceeds, exclusive of interest and costs, the 

sum of Seventy-Five Thousand ($75,000.00) Dollars.



2. The jurisdiction of this Court is based upon a federal question, 18 

U.S.C. § 1962(c), Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, and 

diversity of citizenship pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. In 

addition, this Court has general and specific jurisdiction over each and 

every defendant in this action.



3. Venue is proper in the United States District Court for the Southern 

District of Texas, Houston Division under 18 U.S.C. § 1965(a), Racketeer 

Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because 

the Defendants reside in or conduct business within the State of Texas 

and/or committed some or all of the acts giving rise to the claims in this 

action within this judicial district.
II. INTRODUCTION
4. The Amway Corporation distributes household products for which its 

principal competitor is Procter & Gamble. The basic product lines of Amway 

and Procter & Gamble coincide in a host of key areas. For instance, Procter 

& Gamble's Tide and Cheer laundry detergents are in direct competition with 

Amway's SA-8 laundry products; Procter & Gamble's Crest and Gleem 

toothpastes compete with Amway's Glister; and Procter & Gamble's Spic n Span 

and Top Job compete with Amway's L.O.C. Multipurpose Cleaner.



5. Unlike Procter & Gamble, which sells its products through traditional 

retail networks, Amway sells its products through a network of distributors 

in what it refers to as a multi-level marketing plan. At first blush, the 

plan would appear to focus upon the recruitment of a large sales force to 

move Amway products to market through door to-door sales. In reality, the 

plan primarily rewards distributors for recruiting new distributors, who

will in turn be rewarded for recruiting new distributors, in a seemingly 

endless proliferation of "downlines." Whereas the normal retail distribution 

model relies upon a minimal number of middlemen to move products to market, 

the Amway system depends upon a multiplicity of layers.



6. Amway's distributors are, in effect, its employees. Amway exerts 

substantial control over how and where the plan and product information must 

be presented, over the way distributors must manage their "downline," and 

over almost every aspect of a distributor's conduct. Amway even describes 

how a distributor should deal with a spouse in a divorce.  



7. Amway can, and does, exert such tight control because all aspects of the 

Amway Corporation and its distribution network are effectively controlled by 

the same small group of people. The same families that own Amway also own 

the highest level active distributor, Ja-Ri, to which all other distributors 

ultimately report. (The name Ja-Ri is a conjunction of the first names of 

the two founders of Amway.) Furthermore, Amway and Ja-Ri control the Amway 

Distributor's Advisory Council (the ADAC), which is supposedly the forum for 

distributors to have a voice in the business.



8. Amway has engaged in a widespread pattern of unfair competition against 

Procter & Gamble in an effort to lure consumers into becoming Amway 

distributors. Amway has published false claims to the effect that Tide 

laundry detergent will form "sludge" that will clog the user's drainpipes. 

Distributors are also covertly encouraged to spread a variety of disparaging 

remarks about other Procter & Gamble products, such as the false claim that 

Crest toothpaste contains abrasives which damage teeth. Most disturbing, 

however, are the persistent false rumors circulated by Amway distributors

implying that Procter & Gamble is affiliated with satanism.



9. Amway engages in disparagement and other unfair competition as a part of 

its overall effort to lure customers away from Procter & Gamble products, 

enticing them to become a part of the Amway distribution scheme.



10. The Amway enterprise is in reality an elaborate, illegal pyramid scheme. 

Amway's objective is to entice consumers out of the retail marketplace by 

convincing them that purchasing Amway products will make them rich. Of those 

who invest the time, money, and personal sacrifice to become Amway 

Distributors, only a select few ever break even. Even fewer realize the 

profits touted by Amway in its sales pitch--and they do so by siphoning 

money from the victims at the bottom.



11. This action seeks to recover the losses Procter & Gamble suffers because 

Amway's unlawful pyramid scheme has diverted consumers from the legitimate 

marketplace and because the defendants have promoted lies about Procter & 

Gamble and its products. A measurable percentage of Amway distributors 

previously purchased Procter & Gamble products and would still be purchasing 

Procter & Gamble products had they not been misled by the Defendants.



12. All pyramid schemes take from those at the bottom to benefit those at 

the top. A simple pyramid is an unadorned payment of money, coupled with the 

promise that by recruiting a new crop of victims the payor will become the 

payee many times over. To profit requires one to enter the game early, 

recruit others, and advance quickly to the top of the pyramid. The promise 

is basic: If you allow yourself to be victimized today, you will

profit by victimizing those below you tomorrow. The scheme requires 

potentially infinite growth to support the promises made to new recruits.



13. The Amway Pyramid is elaborately disguised as a marketing network in 

which "products" flow down in return for money flowing up. The existence of 

the "products" creates the illusion of legitimacy and masks the purpose of 

the payments. No legitimate distribution network contains so many layers of 

middlemen, selling and reselling the same goods a dozen or more times, 

encouraging those below to keep the base of the pyramid expanding with new 

victims. And, the pressure to keep Amway's pyramid going with new recruits 

is enormous, because the Amway Pyramid is in a constant state of collapse 

and renewal. In 1996, the average Amway distributor earns just $36.08 per 

month beforeexpenses. Every year 50% of Amway's distributors realize 

the futility of the venture and withdraw.



14. But Amway's own numbers demonstrate that it is not really in the 

business of marketing goods to the public. According to the most recent 

statistics available, 82% of all final sales of Amway products are made to 

Amway distributors. Hence, like every pyramid scheme, the Amway Pyramid is a 

closed system--the profits come not from the distribution of a good or 

service to those outside the pyramid, but from a redistribution of

wealth among the layers within the pyramid.



15. The Amway Pyramid has proven so successful at redistributing wealth that 

it has spawned a second line of business--the sale of "tools" to lower 

level distributors. "Tools" are primarily motivational tapes of dubious 

value produced by the highest level Amway distributors. They are sold only 

to those within the Amway Pyramid. Buying tapes is characterized as an 

essential ingredient to success as an Amway distributor; distributors

are pressured to buy at least one per week. The tape business is immensely 

profitable for those at the top, providing additional incentive for them to 

replenish the continually collapsing pyramid with new victims.



16. In the early 1980's, Amway acknowledged that the motivational tape 

business rendered the entire Amway organization an illegal pyramid scheme. 

Amway co-founder, Richard M. DeVos, Sr. told Distributors: "Now, the tape 

business, if it is not used as a support for the Amway business, will 

oftentimes be an illegal business--in fact, it could be called a pyramid-- 

because [product] does not get sold to the consumer..." DeVos

continued:



     "Let me talk to you about the legal side...that deals with pyramids, 

     that deals with the illegal operation of a business that does not have 

     an end consumer, where product is not retailed. That would include all 

     books and tapes. The sad news, folks, is that when those things go out 

     that way and become excessive...then it becomes an out and out illegal 

     pyramid...



17. The motivational tool business has since expanded. More importantly, 

DeVos' remarks amount to an admission that Amway is "an out and out illegal 

pyramid" by virtue of its being "a business that does not have an end 

consumer, where product is not retailed."



18. So long as consumers are misled by inflated promises and lies into 

joining the Amway Pyramid, Procter & Gamble will continue to be damaged-- 

foreclosed from a significant segment of the consumer market and vilified by 

false rumors. Amway and the Defendants who help it have engaged in a 

persistent pattern of corrupt activity.



Accordingly, Procter & Gamble is entitled to relief.
III. THE PARTIES
19. The Procter & Gamble Company is an Ohio corporation with its principal 

place of business in Cincinnati, Ohio. It is therefore a citizen of Ohio. 

The Procter & Gamble Company and its subsidiary and affiliated companies 

manufacture and distribute consumer products and sell them in Texas and 

throughout the United States. These products include Tide, Era, Cheer and 

Bold laundry detergents, Crest and Gleem toothpastes, Biz laundry bleach, 

Ivory, Zest, Camay and Safeguard bar soaps. Cascade dishwashing soap, Folger 

coffee, Mr. Clean, Comet and Spic & Span household cleaning products, Crisco 

cooking products, Bounty paper towels, Charmin bathroom tissue, Pert

and Prell shampoos, Scope mouthwash, Pampers and Luvs diapers, Bounce fabric 

softener, Duncan Hines baking mixes, CoverGirl cosmetics. Secret and Sure 

deodorants, Dawn dishwashing liquid and many other food, laundry, cleaning, 

and personal care products. A more complete list of these products is 

attached as Exhibit 1.



20. The Procter & Gamble Distributing Company ("Procter & Gamble 

Distributing") is an Ohio corporation with its principal place of business 

in Cincinnati, Ohio. Procter & Gamble Distributing is therefore a citizen of 

Ohio. Procter & Gamble Distributing sells and distributes Procter & Gamble 

products, including those identified in the preceding paragraph, to its 

customers which include retailers and wholesale distributors throughout

the United States, including within the State of Texas. Procter & Gamble 

Distributing is a subsidiary of The Procter & Gamble Company.



21. Defendant Amway Corporation ("Amway") is a Michigan corporation with its 

principal place of business in Ada, Michigan. Amway is a privately-held 

company owned and controlled by the DeVos and Van Andel families. (See 

Exhibit 2.) Amway, through its employees and its chain of distributor-

agents, including the Defendants herein, engages in the business of 

recruiting consumers to become "distributors" of Amway products. Amway 

products are sold and distributed nationwide and include: Glister anti-

plaque fluoride toothpaste, SA8 Plus Premium laundry detergent, Crystal 

Bright dishwashing soap, Far Corners and Nine to Five coffee products, 

Durishine household cleaning product, Modern Magic Meals vegetable oil pan 

coating spray, Meadowbrook paper towels and bathroom tissue, Satinique sport 

shampoo, Amway Zoom Spray Cleaner, Artistry cosmetics, Deter deodorant, 

Amway Dish Drops dishwashing liquid, L.O.C multipurpose cleaner, Amway 

Fabric Softener and Brightener and many other food, laundry, cleaning and 

personal care products. Amway also sells and distributes, through a 

catalog,products made by other manufacturers. Amway does not offer for sale 

any product made by Procter & Gamble. Defendant Amway Corporation may be 

served with process through its registered agent for service, CT 

Corporation, at 350 N. St. Paul Street, Dallas, Texas 75201.



22. Many Amway products distributed by Defendants compete with Procter & 

Gamble's products in the consumer market nationwide. A list of many of the 

Amway products which compete with Procter & Gamble products is attached 

hereto as Exhibit 1. Amway specifically advertises against Procter & 

Gamble's products in its publications such as its monthly AMAGRAMmagazine 

and its Amway Product Demonstrations Guide, both of which are sent through 

the U.S. Mails. Copies of examples of such advertisements are attached as 

Exhibit 3. Information in such advertisements concerning Procter & Gamble

products is often inaccurate, false and/or misleading.



23. Defendant The Amway distributors Association Council ("ADAC") is 

comprised of high-level Amway distributors such as members of the DeVos and 

Van Andel families, Ja-Ri and Defendants Haugen, Wilson and Rummel. The ADAC 

is a Michigan corporation whose business address has been the same as Amway 

in Ada, Michigan. (See Exhibit 4.) The ADAC has 30 board members. Fifteen 

are elected by less than 1% of Amway distributors. The other 15 are 

nominated by Amway and elected by other board members. The ADAC, in 

conjunction with Amway and Ja-Ri, controls and supervises Amway 

distributors. The ADAC consults and advises Amway on all aspects of the 

Amway business. The ADAC further consults, advises, enacts and implements 

Amway disciplinary rules on behalf of Amway. The ADAC was directly involved 

in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Defendant The Amway Distributors 

Association Council may be served with process through its registered agent 

for service, Kim S. Mitchell, at 7575 East Fulton Street, Ada, Michigan 

49355.



24. Defendant Ja-Ri is a Michigan Corporation whose business address is the 

same as Amway in Ada, Michigan. Ja-Ri was incorporated by Richard M. DeVos, 

Sr. and Jay Van Andel in 1963. (See Exhibit 5.) Ja-Ri is a privately-held 

company owned and controlled by the DeVos and Van Andel families. Amway and 

Ja-Ri are operated as a single entity, using a common place of business, 

having common employees, and having common owners. Amway and Ja-Ri 

intermingle their assets and fail to adequately observe corporate 

formalities. Ja-Ri holds title to real estate used by the DeVos and Van 

Andel families for residential purposes. Ja-Ri, in conjunction with Amway 

and the ADAC, controls and supervises Amway Distributors. Ja-Ri was directly 

involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Defendant Ja-Ri Corporation 

may be served with process through its registered agent for service, Kim S. 

Mitchell, at 7575 East Fulton Street, Ada, Michigan

49355.



25. Defendant Donald R. Wilson is a citizen of the State of Utah, residing 

in Ogden, Utah. At all relevant times, Wilson was a top-level Executive 

Diamond Amway distributor. Wilson was directly involved in the wrongful 

conduct alleged herein. Wilson engaged in the wrongful conduct in his 

individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of 

Amway and as a representative of defendant, WOW International Inc. ("WOW"), 

aka Wilson International Network, and Wilson Enterprises, Inc., entities 

through which Wilson conducts his Amway business activities. WOW is a Utah

corporation with its principal place of business at 1190 E. 5425 South, 

Ogden, Utah. WOW is privately owned and controlled by Don and Nancy Wilson. 

WOW is one of the corporate entities through which Defendant Don Wilson 

conducts his business, including his Texas business activities, as an Amway 

distributor. (Wilson, WOW, Wilson International Network and Wilson 

Enterprises are hereinafter referred to collectively as "Wilson." ) Wilson

conducts business extensively in Texas, conducting seminars for Amway 

distributors, renting meeting halls and auditoriums in Texas for Amway 

seminars, arranging speaking engagements by Texas citizens and supervising, 

training, controlling and benefiting from the efforts of numerous Texas 

Amway distributors. Wilson's network of Amway distributors is primarily 

centered in Utah, Texas, Arizona, and Nevada. At all relevant times, Wilson

was an agent of Amway. Defendant Donald R. Wilson may be served with process 

at 1190 E. 5425S, Ogden, Utah 84403. Defendant WOW International, Inc. may 

be served with process through its registered agent for service, Donald R. 

Wilson, at 1190 E. 5425S, Ogden. Utah 84403. Defendant Wilson Enterprises, 

Inc. may be served with process through Donald R. Wilson, one of its 

principals, officers, agents or directors, at 1190 E. 5425S, Ogden, Utah 

84403.



26. Defendant Ronald Rummel is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in 

Dallas, Texas. At all relevant times, Rummel was an agent of Amway, a 

Diamond-level Amway distributor and a member of the ADAC. Rummel's business 

is located in Texas. Rummel transacts business in this District of Texas. 

Rummel was directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Rummel 

engaged in the wrongful conduct in his individual capacity and in his 

capacity as a representative and agent of Amway and Rummel Enterprises. 

Rummel and Rummel Enterprises are hereinafter collectively referred to as 

"Rummel." Defendant Ronald A. Rummel may be served with process at

11875 Forestgate Drive, Dallas, Texas 75243. Defendant Rummel Enterprises 

may be served with process through its principal, agent or partner, Ronald 

A. Rummel, at 11875 Forestgate Drive, Dallas, Texas 75243.



27. Defendant Roger D. Patton is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing 

in Magnolia, Texas. At all relevant times, Patton was an agent of Amway and 

an Amway distributor. Patton's business is headquartered in Texas. Patton 

transacts substantial business in Texas. Patton was directly involved in the 

wrongful conduct alleged herein. Patton engaged in the wrongful conduct in 

his individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of 

Amway. Defendant Roger D. Patton may be served with process at 40818 

Pipestone Road, Magnolia, Texas 77355.



28. Defendant Jeffery G. Musgrove is a citizen of the State of Texas, 

residing in Katy, Texas. At all relevant times, Musgrove was an agent of 

Amway and an Amway distributor. Musgrove was directly involved in the 

wrongful conduct alleged herein. Musgrove engaged in the wrongful conduct in 

his individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of 

Amway and Defendant Musgrove Enterprises, a Texas partnership entity through 

which Musgrove conducts his Amway business activities. Musgrove and Musgrove 

Enterprises are hereinafter referred to collectively as "Musgrove."

Defendant Jeffrey G. Musgrove may be served with process at 6110 Plantation 

Bay Drive, Houston, Texas 77084. Defendant Musgrove Enterprises may be 

served with process through its principal, agent or partner, Jeffrey G. 

Musgrove, at 6110 Plantation Bay Drive, Houston, Texas 77084.



29. Defendant Kevin Shinn is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in 

Greenville, Texas. At all relevant times, Shinn was an agent of Amway and an 

Amway distributor. Shinn's business is located in Texas. Shinn transacts 

substantial business in Texas. Shinn was directly involved in the wrongful 

conduct alleged herein. Shinn engaged in the wrongful conduct in his 

individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of 

Amway. Defendant Kevin Shinn may be served with process at County Road

1083, Greenville, Texas 75401.



30. Defendant Randy Haugen is a citizen of the State of Utah, residing in 

Ogden, Utah. At all relevant times, Haugen was an agent of Amway and an 

Amway distributor. Although Haugen's principal place of business is in Utah, 

he transacts a substantial amount of business in Texas. Haugen's business 

activities in Texas include, but are not limited to, sales of products to 

Amway distributors in Texas, supervision, training and control of Amway 

distributors in Texas, sending false and defamatory messages concerning 

Procter & Gamble to Amway distributors in Texas and receiving benefits from

the activities of downline Amway distributors located in Texas. Haugen was 

directly involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein in his individual 

capacity as a representative and agent of Amway and Defendant Freedom Tools, 

Inc., and Freedom Associates, Utah corporations through which Haugen 

conducts Amway business activities. Haugen and Defendants Freedom Tools, 

Inc. and Freedom Associates are hereinafter collectively referred to as 

"Haugen." Defendant Randy Haugen may be served with process at 2488 

Bonneville Terrace, Ogden, Utah 84403. Defendant Freedom Associates, Inc. 

may be served with process through its registered agent for service, Randy 

Haugen, at 2488 Bonneville Terrace, Ogden, Utah 84403. Defendant Freedom 

Tools, Inc. may be served with process through its registered agent for 

service, Randy Haugen, at 2488 Bonneville Terrace, Ogden, Utah 84403.



31. Defendant Randy Walker is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in 

Spring, Texas. At all relevant times, Walker was an agent of Amway and an 

Amway distributor. Walker's business is located in Texas. Walker transacts 

business in Texas. Walker was directly involved in the wrongful conduct 

alleged herein in his individual capacity as a representative and agent of 

Amway and Defendant Walker International Network, a Texas partnership 

through which Walker conducts Amway business activities. Walker and Walker

International Network are hereinafter collectively referred to as "Walker." 

Defendant Randy Walker may be served with process at 17688 Kuykendahl Road, 

Spring, Texas 77379. Defendant Walker International Network may be served 

through Randy Walker, one of its principals, agents, or partners, at 17688 

Kuykendahl Road, Spring, Texas 77379.



32. Defendant Gene Shaw is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in 

Whiteright, Texas. At all relevant times, Shaw was an agent of Amway and an 

Amway distributor. Shaw's business is located in Texas. Shaw transacts 

business in Texas. Shaw was directly involved in the wrongful conduct 

alleged herein. Shaw engaged in the wrongful conduct in his individual 

capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of Amway. 

Defendant Gene Shaw may be served with process at Rural Route 1, Whiteright, 

Texas 75491.



33. Defendant Robert Schmanski is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing 

in Houston, Texas. At all relevant times, Schmanski was an agent of Amway 

and an Amway Distributor. Schmanski's business is located in Texas. 

Schmanski transacts business in Texas. Schmanski was directly involved in 

the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Schmanski engaged in the wrongful 

conduct in his individual capacity and in his capacity as a representative 

and agent of Amway and Schmanski Enterprises. Schmanski and Schmanski 

Enterprises are hereinafter collectively referred to as "Schmanski." 

Defendant Robert Schmanski may be served with process at 17167 Beaver 

Springs, Houston, Texas 77090. Defendant Schmanski Enterprises may be served 

with process through its principal, agent or partner, Robert Schmanski, at 

17167 Beaver Springs, Texas 77090.



34. Defendant Mark Pruitt is a citizen of the State of Texas, residing in 

Houston, Texas. At all relevant times, Pruitt was an agent of Amway and an 

Amway distributor. Pruitt's business is located in Texas. Pruitt transacts 

business in Texas. Pruitt was directly involved in the wrongful conduct 

alleged herein. Pruitt engaged in the wrongful conduct in his individual 

capacity and in his capacity as a representative and agent of Amway.

Defendant Mark Pruitt may be served with process at 1607 Sweet Grass Trail, 

Houston, Texas 77090.



35. Defendant William Bredemeyer is a citizen of the State of Texas, 

residing in Channelview, Texas. At all relevant times, Bredemeyer was an 

agent of Amway and an Amway distributor. Bredemeyer's business is located in 

Texas. Bredemeyer transacts business in Texas. Bredemeyer was directly 

involved in the wrongful conduct alleged herein. Bredemeyer engaged in the 

wrongful conduct in his individual capacity and in his capacity as a 

representative and agent of Amway. Defendant William Bredemeyer may be 

served with process at 722 Sheldon Road, Channelview, Texas 77530.



36. Defendants John and Jane Does 1-5, whose complete identities and 

addresses are unknown as this time, upon information and belief, are 

individual distributors who are agents of Amway who conduct business in 

Texas, and are involved in the sale and distribution of Amway consumer 

products and the development of Amway business.



37. Defendants John and Jane Doe 6-10, whose complete identities and 

addresses are unknown at this time, upon information and belief are business 

entities who are agents of Amway and are involved in the sale and 

distribution of Amway consumer products and the development of Amway 

business in Texas.



38. Ja-Ri, Wilson, Rummel, Patton, Musgrove, Shinn, Haugen, Walker, Shaw, 

Schmanski, Pruitt, Bredemeyer, John and Jane Does 1-5 and John and Jane Does 

6-10, shall be hereinafter referred to as "Distributor Defendants" unless 

expressly stated otherwise.
IV. FACTS
A. Amway and Multilevel Marketing



39. Defendants distribute Amway products through a complex network of 

resellers that is sometimes referred to as a multilevel marketing scheme. In 

the United States, this network comprises hundreds of thousands of 

individuals organized in a pyramidal structure with Amway, Ja-Ri and members 

of the ADAC at the top of the pyramid.



40. Amway was founded by two salesmen of vitamin supplements. These 

salesmen, Richard M. DeVos, Sr. and Jay Van Andel, devised an elaborate 

commission scheme through which they recruited others to sell products. They 

offered the recruits a portion of the commission on any products sold and 

retained a portion of the commission themselves. The commission structure 

encouraged recruits to, in turn, recruit others below them. DeVos and Van 

Andel named their marketing company "Ja-Ri." Eventually, DeVos and Van Andel 

began marketing soap and detergent products under the label "Amway."

Amway's products compete directly against products distributed through more 

traditional retail channels by Procter & Gamble.



41. Each new Amway recruit joined the organization below a "sponsor." Amway 

defines a "line of sponsorship" as the "linkage between all distributors in 

a specific Distributor organization." The recruiting of new members 

eventually grew into an enormous chain of sponsors and recruits. In Amway 

jargon, a recruit is "downline" from his or her sponsor, and a sponsor is 

"upline" from the recruit.



42. It is estimated that certain members of Amway have more than a million 

downline members. Ja-Ri is believed to be "upline" from all but one 

distributor out of the 2-1/2 million Amway members. Ja-Ri technically has 

one inactive upline sponsor from the early 1950's. In Amway jargon, recruits 

who fill out an application to join Amway are termed "distributors."





B. Amway's Distributors are the Agents and Employees of Amway



43. Amway's distributors are the employees and agents of Amway. Amway and 

its distributors collectively constitute a single business enterprise, and 

are dependent upon each other.



44. Amway's "distributors" are commissioned sales agents who must follow an 

extensive set of rules and regulations controlling the means and manner in 

which the distributors market Amway products. For instance, Amway 

distributors must present the "plan" for recruiting new members in 

compliance with prescribed Amway literature and sales aids, are prohibited 

from selling products to certain classes of persons, may not sell

products in certain places (such as out of their office), are significantly 

restricted in their ability to sell non-Amway products, are prohibited from 

resigning without Amway approval, and are even instructed on how to conduct 

themselves in the event of a divorce. The most fundamental tenet of Amway 

Distributorship is obedience to the upline distributors--which leads 

ultimately to Amway itself.



45. Amway has a legally controlling relationship with ifs distributor 

organization, because the same two families that control Amway also control 

the highest active distributor (Ja-Ri) in the Amway Pyramid. Both Amway and 

the distributor network are under common control.



46. The controlling "partnership" relationship between Amway and its 

distributors is also demonstrated by the interworkings of Amway and the 

Amway distributors Association Council ("ADAC") (formerly called the 

"American Way Association" and "Amway Distributors' Association").



47. The ADAC states that its purpose is to give Distributors a "voice" and 

"a means by which they could influence policy decisions" of Amway. In 

reality, the ADAC is merely an arm and instrument of Amway, used as yet 

another means by which to control its distributors.



48. Richard M. DeVos, Sr. and Jay Van Andel, and/or members of their 

families, have served on the ADAC since its inception, in their capacities 

as distributors. For example, Doug DeVos, son of Amway co-founder Richard M. 

DeVos, Sr., was a member of the ADAC's Executive Council in 1995. Because 

all members of the ADAC are required to be distributors, DeVos sat on the 

ADAC as a distributor (Ja-Ri), and not as a representative of Amway.



49. The 30 members of the ADAC are typically those at the highest levels of 

the Amway Pyramid. Fifteen of the 30 are elected by the less than 1% of 

Amway distributors entitled to vote. The other 15 are elected by the first 

15, from a list of nominees proposed by Amway.



50. The ADAC ostensibly serves as an advisor and paid consultant to Amway. 

The ADAC also acts as a "board of arbitration." When Amway charges that a 

distributor has violated an Amway rule, the distributor can appeal the 

decision to the ADAC. The ADAC then conducts an evidentiary hearing, engages 

in fact-finding and decides whether Amway's decision was correct. In-house 

Amway attorneys attend and participate in the ADAC hearings. Theoretically, 

the ADAC's determination is not binding on Amway, but the distinction is 

meaningless given that Amway effectively controls the ADAC to begin with.



51. Amway is able to control the ADAC, through its membership (as 

distributor Ja-Ri) on the ADAC and through its power to nominate ADAC 

members. Amway therefore controls the purported trade association of its 

distributors. This control augments Amway's ability to control distributors 

through its rules and regulations and through Ja-Ri.





C. The Amway Pyramid



52. The principal purpose of Amway is not to sell consumer goods at retail 

in fair competition with Procter & Gamble. Amway's purpose is to divert 

consumers from the retail marketplace, creating a captive audience which 

buys Amway products to the exclusion of all others in the false hope that 

doing so will lead to riches. At present, Amway has successfully recruited 

roughly 2.5 million consumers.



53. The bedrock of the Amway system is, in their terms, "dreambuilding." The 

message is twofold: first, that money will solve all your problems; and 

second, that Amway is a simple and easy way to make vast amounts of money.



54. Once hooked by the dream, the sales pitch to a new distributor switches 

almost exclusively to the money to be made by recruiting additional 

distributors. Through Amway's highly developed sliding scale of commissions, 

the real money comes from a distributor's cut on those he or she recruits-- 

the distributor's "downline." One survives in Amway not by selling soap to 

neighbors, but by reselling the dream over and over and exhorting one's 

downline to do likewise. If new recruits will do as instructed, their

downlines should in theory expand exponentially, with each new layer of 

recruits enriching those above.



55. To sell the dream one is required to buy Amway products. The dream is, 

after all, ostensibly based upon the distribution of Amway goods. A 

distributor must show faith in the "product." Becoming a 100% Amway 

household is promoted as a key to Amway success. Hence Amway diverts 

consumers from the marketplace not because of the merits of its products, 

but because the consumer believes that purchasing the product is a 

prerequisite to obtaining the dream. Meanwhile, Procter & Gamble loses any 

prospect of fairly competing with Amway for sales to consumers misled into 

becoming a part of the Amway scheme.



56. First, just 18% of Amway's products are sold to non-distributors; Amway 

and its distributorship network is in reality a pyramid scheme. The Amway 

distribution network is not intended to distribute products, but rather to 

redistribute cash within the pyramid. Like all pyramids, the Amway scheme is 

a closed system. If is a closed system in which money is funneled from the 

base to the apex.



57. Second, the Amway model is patently unworkable as a product distribution 

network. From the top of the distribution chain to the bottom spans dozens 

of layers of distributors. If Amway were a business in which the objective 

was to move products to market, it would fail for the sheer multiplicity of 

middlemen, each of whom must rely upon the price of the product to produce 

some measure of profit. Those who enter at the bottom of that pyramid face a 

nearly insurmountable task of creating a downline large enough to generate 

their own commissions, only worsening the problem. As one publication noted

in 1993, "for the present two million distributors to achieve financial 

independence would mean that perhaps another 50 million distributors would 

have to be signed up." Canadian Business (July 1993).



58. Third, Amway's data demonstrates the economic absurdity of its 

distribution model. The average monthly gross income of all Amway 

distributors before expenses for 1996 was $36.08. Meanwhile, only 1% of 

Amway Distributors ever reach the first and most basic level of achievement--

direct distributorship, which signifies little more than a break-even 

operation. Thus the odds are roughly 99 to 1 against a new distributor ever

developing a viable--much less thriving--Amway business. Yet all the while, 

the 99% of Amway Distributors being exploited for the gains of a few 

continue buying Amway products to the exclusion of Procter & Gamble.



59. Fourth, that Amway is a pyramid is demonstrated by its continual state 

of collapse. Each year, half of Amway's distributors realize the futility of 

the enterprise and quit. But Procter & Gamble cannot recoup the sales it 

lost while those distributors were obediently following the Amway creed, 

loyally supporting their uplines, and being exposed to the Amway 

organization's vilification of Procter & Gamble.



60. Finally, Amway's pyramidal structure is revealed by the subsidiary 

business in "tools" that uses the same network of downlines to distribute 

products which have no commercial value to anyone outside the Amway Pyramid. 

The "tools" consist of motivational tape recordings, books and rallies 

produced or sponsored by the upper echelon of the Amway Pyramid. Recruits 

are expected to buy the "tools" through standing orders--generally one a 

week at $5 to $8 each. In fact, they are told that success only comes with 

purchase of tools. The tools produce enormous profits for the uplines.

Sustaining that profit is in itself a substantial motivation to find and 

keep new Amway recruits, removing consumers from the marketplace to generate 

the cash necessary to sustain the Amway Pyramid.



61. Defendants' operation of an illegal pyramid by itself constitutes unfair 

competition that significantly reduces Procter & Gamble's consumers. The 

pyramid scheme, however, is only one aspect of Amway's pattern of unfair 

competition.



D. Defendants' Other Conduct Specifically Directed at, and Injurious to, 

Procter & Gamble



1. The Satanism Lie.



62. Procter & Gamble was formed in 1837, and in 1882, it registered a 

trademark sometimes referred to as the "Moon and Stars" design. The design 

depicts the man in the moon and 13 stars, one for each of the original 

American states. Successive minor variations of this design were also 

federally registered under United States Registration No. 298059.



63. The "Moon and Stars" trademark is a corporate symbol under which Procter 

& Gamble has conducted business throughout the United States and around the 

world for over one hundred years. Procter & Gamble's business has always 

been based upon the principle of providing products of superior quality and 

value that best meet the needs of consumers.



64. Beginning in the early 1980's, and continuing since that time, Amway 

distributors have maligned Procter & Gamble and its products by circulating 

a false and malicious statement to the effect that Procter & Gamble is 

associated with Satan and that profits from the sale of Procter & Gamble 

products are contributed to the "Church of Satan." Typically, the false and 

malicious statement (the "Satanic Message") relates that the President of 

Procter & Gamble appeared on the Phil Donahue television program and

stated that Procter & Gamble was associated with Satan. The Satanic Message 

typically states that Procter & Gamble's Moon and Stars trademark is a 

Satanic symbol which has appeared or will appear on Procter & Gamble product 

labels along with the numbers "666," said to be the mark of the devil. The 

Satanic Message typically urges that consumers boycott all Procter & Gamble 

products, including some 40 specifically identified Procter & Gamble 

products. (See Exhibit 6.)



65. The Satanic Message is a vicious misrepresentation and a false and 

malicious disparagement of Procter & Gamble. Procter & Gamble is not, and 

never has been, associated with Satan, the Church of Satan or any similar 

religion or entity. No product ever manufactured, distributed or sold by 

Procter & Gamble has been associated with Satan, the Church of Satan or any 

similar religion or entity. No president or any other employee of Procter & 

Gamble, including its current president, has ever appeared on the

Phil Donahue television program or any other television or radio program and 

announced an association with the Church of Satan, because there is no 

association. Procter & Gamble has never supported Satan, the Church of Satan 

or any similar religion or entity in any manner whatsoever. The Satanic 

Message, and every portion of it, is false and malicious and calculated to 

negatively impact Procter & Gamble and the sales of Procter & Gamble 

products.



66. Procter & Gamble complained to Amway in 1980's that a large number of 

reports received by Procter & Gamble of circulation of the Satanic Message 

identified Amway distributors as the source.



67. Amway responded by assuring Procter & Gamble that Amway would do all if 

could to stop its distributors from further circulating the false and 

malicious statement. Procter & Gamble relied on Amway's promises and 

assurances, which came from Amway's top officials.



68. Amway itself has admitted that the Satanic Message is false and 

malicious and that its repetition by Amway distributors constitutes unfair 

competition. Nevertheless, and despite its numerous assurances to Procter & 

Gamble, Amway did little or nothing to stop its distributors from spreading 

the Satanic Message. As of  this date, Procter & Gamble has identified for 

Amway dozens of Amway distributors who have circulated the false and 

malicious statement. To date, Amway has taken no disciplinary action

whatsoever against any of those distributors. None have been censured. None 

have been suspended. None have been terminated. In fact, other than a few 

advisory letters to distributors and distributor organizations who were 

caught spreading the Satanic Message, the sum total of Amway's efforts to 

squelch the rumor in its distributor organization was primarily to twice 

publish in articles buried in Amway periodicals that Amway "does not 

condone" the spreading of the message about Procter & Gamble.



69. The Satanic Message was disseminated by Amway distributors again in 1995 

on a massive scale in different forms and by different media. The first of 

several known disseminations began in or about April 1995, when Defendant 

Bredemayer, in Houston, Texas, distributed a written version of the Satanic 

Message to Defendant Robert Schmanski, also an Amway distributor in Texas. 

Schmanski, in turn, spread the Satanic Message to Texas Amway distributor 

Defendant Roger Patton.



70. Roger Patton created a tape recording of the Satanic Message and sent it 

by telephone to Defendant Jeffrey Musgrove, also an Amway distributor. 

Patton's vehicle for transmitting the message to Musgrove was an interstate 

long distance telephone transmission and recording service known as "Amvox." 

Amvox is operated, sold and provided by Amway to its distributors. Amway 

established and markets and controls the Amvox system in order to facilitate 

mass communications between Amway and its distributors and among Amway 

distributors themselves. Amvox allows an Amway distributor to instantly send 

a recorded message by telephone to the telephone answering machines of 

thousands of other Amway distributors throughout the world. Amway profits 

from its distributors' subscriptions to the Amvox system.



71. Musgrove forwarded the Satanic Message via the Amvox system to Texas 

Amway distributor Defendant Randy Walker. Walker, a Diamond level Amway 

distributor, in turn forwarded the Satanic Message via the Amvox system to 

Defendant Haugen, a top Amway distributor in Defendant Wilson's downline 

organization. Haugen is, and at all material times was, an "Executive 

Diamond" Distributor in the Amway Pyramid and a member of the ADAC and the 

ADAC Executive Committee.



72. Haugen then transmitted the Satanic Message via the Amvox system to 

thousands of his downline distributors. In accordance with standing orders 

to pass along any instructions received from upline distributors, the 

recipients of the Haugen transmission in turn sent the Satanic Message to 

numerous other Amway distributors. A copy of the transcript of the Amvox

version of the Satanic Message is attached hereto as Exhibit 7.



73. The Satanic Message then proliferated through the enormous Haugen 

organization. Amway itself admits that "thousands" of Amway distributors 

received Haugen's broadcast of the Satanic Message or subsequent 

transmissions of it. The false and malicious statement ran rampant through  

Haugen's organization of over 60,000 downline Amway distributors. It is 

believed that the message was sent to  numerous other Amway distributors and 

others throughout the United States and elsewhere, including South America.



74. At some point in this process, the Haugen Satanic Message crossed into 

at least two other, large organizations of Amway distributors. First, the 

message was sent by top Amway Diamond-level distributor Defendant Ronald A. 

Rummel, via the Amvox system, of one or more members of Rummel's large 

distributor organization. Second, the Haugen Amvox message was received by 

members of another large distributor organization known as International 

Connection and further disseminated among the many Amway distributors within 

that group.



75. Concurrently with the transmissions and retransmissions of the Satanic 

Message via the Amvox system, a written version of the Satanic Message was 

being disseminated within the Amway distributor organization by numerous 

Amway distributors. Texas Amway distributor Defendant Kevin Shinn placed 

written copies of the Satanic Messages in packages of Amway products he 

distributed to other Amway distributors.



76. Defendant Gene Shaw, another Texas Amway distributor, repeated the 

Satanic Message from the stage to several hundred Amway distributors at an 

Amway meeting in Texas.



77. Defendant Mark Pruitt, a Texas Amway distributor, handed out a written 

version and/or verbally repeated the Satanic Message on a nightly basis to 

many other Amway distributors during Amway meetings at Pruitt's house.



78. In addition, a flyer containing the Satanic Message and the further 

suggestion that Procter & Gamble products are poisonous was disseminated by 

a Texas Amway distributor to numerous other Amway distributors with 

instructions to pass out copies door-to-door because doing so would help the 

distributors' Amway business. The distributors complied and handed out 

numerous copies of the false and malicious document, a copy of which is 

attached as Exhibit 8.



79. Although Haugen later issued by Amvox a purported retraction of his 

Amvox transmission of the Satanic Message, after he got caught, the 

purported retraction was not received by all of the recipients of Haugen's 

broadcast and the subsequent rebroadcasts of the false and defamatory  

statement. Amway was aware that a month after Haugen's purported retraction, 

the Satanic Message was still being transmitted among its distributors. (See 

Exhibit 9.) In fact, Amway was made expressly aware that Haugen's

purported retraction was not received by those Amway distributors who were 

still sending and receiving the Satanic Message through the Amway Amvox 

system. Amway could have sent a clear message to its Amvox subscribers and 

Amway distributors through the Amvox telephone message system denouncing 

this deplorable conduct. It did not do so.



80. At about the same time, Amway distributors began asking their pastors to 

tell their congregations that Procter & Gamble was associated with Satan. 

Amway has asserted that churches, not Amway distributors, are the source of 

the Satanic Message. However, when Amway was made expressly aware that one 

or more of its distributors was spreading on the Amvox system a message that 

told Amway distributors to contact every minister of churches and have them 

tell their congregations about Procter & Gamble and the Satanic Message, 

Amway, incredibly, did nothing to effectively address this deplorable, 

malicious and unfair business conduct. (See Exhibit 9.) Amway knew that its 

distributors were engaging in such conduct, but did nothing to effectively 

stop it. During the same time period in which the Haugen-initiated rumor was 

circulating, a 3.5 million member church in Brazil promulgated the rumor and 

urged a boycott of Procter & Gamble products.



81. Amway did nothing to discipline any of the foregoing Amway distributors 

who disseminated the false and malicious Satanic Message in 1995. Amway 

further failed to take steps of effectively stop further dissemination of 

the message by its distributors or effectively communicate to them that the 

message was untrue, and that engaging in this conduct was an unfair and 

illegal business practice. Indeed, Amway did not even inform Procter & 

Gamble of the foregoing incidents in 1995, including the widespread

dissemination of the Satanic Message to thousands of distributors and 

ministers of churches.



82. Amway knew the foregoing statements about Procter & Gamble were false. 

Amway is directly responsible for the acts of its agents and employees in 

spreading the rumor. Furthermore, by failing to act and to effectively stop 

the spread of the Satanic Message by its distributors within its 

organization, Amway has encouraged, acquiesced in and/or ratified the 

foregoing vicious misrepresentations of fact and false statements concerning 

Procter & Gamble and its products.





2. Additional False and Disparaging Statements by Amway Distributors 

Concerning Procter & Gamble and Its Products.



83. In addition to the foregoing false statements by Amway distributors 

concerning Procter & Gamble, Amway distributors, with the knowledge, 

encouragement, tacit approval and/or acquiescence of Amway, have made 

numerous other false and misleading statements concerning Procter & Gamble 

products.



84. In a publication to all Amway distributors, Amway made the clear 

implication that Procter & Gamble's Tide laundry detergent will form 

"sludge" in consumers' drain pipes which will clog such pipes. Amway's 

suggestion concerning Tide was false and was made with knowledge of its 

falsity. (See Exhibit 10.)



85. Amway distributors have stated to other Amway distributors and/or 

consumers that Tide contains "fillers" consisting of sand, clay, peanut 

shells, egg shells and walnut shells. Such statements are false and were 

made with knowledge of their falsity; Tide has never contained any such 

fillers.



86. Amway distributors have stated to other Amway distributors and/or 

consumers that Tide will cause washing machines to rust and does not 

effectively launder clothes. Such statements are false and were made with 

knowledge of their falsity.



87. Amway distributors have stated to other Amway distributors and/or 

consumers that daytime television programs sponsored by Procter & Gamble are 

Satanic. Such statements are false and were made with knowledge of their 

falsity.



88. Amway distributors have stated to other Amway distributors and/or 

consumers that Procter & Gamble's Crest toothpaste contains harmful 

abrasives that will injure the enamel on consumers' teeth. Amway 

distributors also use false and misleading product demonstrations to 

communicate this message. Such statements concerning Crest are false and 

were made with knowledge of their falsity.



89. Amway distributors have stated to other Amway distributors and/or 

consumers that Procter & Gamble's fabric softener products will damage the 

motors of clothes-drying machines. Such statements are false and were made 

with knowledge of their falsity.



90. Amway distributors have stated to other Amway distributors and/or 

consumers that Procter & Gamble's Cascade dishwashing soap promotes the 

growth of harmful bacteria on plates, glasses and eating utensils. Such 

statements concerning Cascade are false and were made with knowledge of 

their falsity.



91. In October of 1996, a concerned consumer called Procter & Gamble after 

seeing an Amway distributor conduct a product demonstration using Tide and 

Ivory Snow. The Amway distributor claimed these Procter & Gamble products, 

when mixed with bleach, would lead to "solidification" in her plumbing. The 

statements concerning Tide and Ivory Snow are false and were made with 

knowledge of their falsity.



92. Amway distributors are believed to have made other false and disparaging 

statements to the effect that Procter & Gamble's products contain harmful 

ingredients and adulterants and/or are harmful to consumers or their 

property.





3. Defendants' Disparaging Statements about Procter & Gamble and its

Products Were False, Malicious and Made for Improper Purposes



93. Defendants have published, circulated, encouraged, acquiesced in and/or 

ratified the foregoing vicious misrepresentations of fact and false 

statements concerning Procter & Gamble and its products, which were known to 

be false and were made, or were allowed to be made, maliciously and/or with 

reckless disregard as to their truth or falsity and which have caused great 

harm and damage to Procter & Gamble, its products, and its business.



94. Defendants, individually and in concert, have made or have allowed to be 

made the foregoing false, defamatory, and product-disparaging statements in 

connection with the recruiting of additional Amway distributors and/or the 

promotion and sale of Amway products in order to support their pyramid, 

obtain economic gain, recruit new Amway distributors and persuade consumers 

(including Amway distributors) to cease purchasing Procter & Gamble products 

and instead purchase competing Amway products, all to the benefit of 

Defendants and to the detriment of Procter & Gamble.



95. Amway distributors tell recruits to accept representations about Amway 

"on faith." Amway distributors attempt to use religious faith as a 

recruiting device, and also to mask the fraudulent nature of their illegal 

pyramid. The Satanic Message is used in the same way, as a recruiting 

device. Amway distributors state that Procter & Gamble is satanic in order 

to buttress their false assertions that Amway is Godly. In addition, both 

false statements are used to coerce Amway distributors to purchase Amway 

products that they otherwise would not purchase, in lieu of the Procter & 

Gamble products that they previously purchased and otherwise would be likely 

to continue to purchase. The Satanic Message is, in short, an additional 

means of preventing the collapse of the Amway Pyramid. One Amway distributor 

confirmed that she was told at an Amway meeting: "when you buy of their 

[Procter & Gamble's] products, you are giving to the devil to keep his work 

going . . . Billy Graham, Jim Bakker . . . they are Amway people. When you 

buy Amway, you give to Jesus."



96. The false and malicious statements published and circulated by Amway 

distributors regarding Procter & Gamble and Procter & Gamble's products 

deceived consumers, and caused consumers to stop purchasing Procter & Gamble 

products. For example, a former Amway distributor in Texas stated that while 

she was a distributor she heard the false Satanic Message and other 

statements disparaging Procter & Gamble from her upline distributors. At the 

time, she believed the statements to be true and as a result ceased buying 

Procter & Gamble products for at least six months. Another Texas Amway 

distributor stated that she still does not know whether the statements 

concerning Procter & Gamble are false, because Defendants have failed to fully 

retract and correct the false statements and representations. The 

statements have caused distributors to take written versions of the Satanic 

Message into stores in order of check to see if a Satanic symbol has appeared 

on Procter & Gamble products. Further, as a result of Defendants' conduct, a 

customer of Procter & Gamble canceled orders for Procter & Gamble products, 

stating: "Based on your president's Satan worship and profits of your company 

going to support Satan's purposes, YOU MAY CANCEL ALL FUTURE SHIPMENTS."97. Amway's failure to discipline any Amway distributor in connection with 

any of the activities and conduct alleged herein has been in spite of the 

fact that Amway knew that its distributors were repeatedly and persistently 

involved in the dissemination and circulation of such statements and 

wrongful product disparagement activities and despite the fact that Amway 

publicly pledged to help Procter & Gamble stop the spread of these false 

statements.



98. Amway's statements, promises and assurances to Procter & Gamble in the 

1980's that Amway would do whatever it could to stop its distributors from 

disseminating the Satanic Message and false statements about Procter & 

Gamble products were knowingly false, and were intended to induce Procter & 

Gamble to rely on such statements, promises and assurances. Procter & Gamble 

reasonably relied on Amway's statements, promises and assurances to Procter 

& Gamble's detriment. Procter & Gamble refrained from bringing action 

against Amway in the 1980's in reasonable reliance on Amway's statements. 

Procter & Gamble only recently discovered that Amway's statements, promises 

and assurances were fraudulent, and that Amway had done little or nothing to 

stop its distributors from making the foregoing false statements about 

Procter & Gamble and its products.



99. Despite Amway's control over its distributors and in direct conflict 

with its representations to Procter & Gamble, Amway has acted with reckless 

indifference and has failed to control its distributors, who on numerous 

occasions over the last fifteen years have continued to spread defamatory 

statements about Procter & Gamble, to disparage Procter & Gamble's products, 

and to commit other wrongful conduct detrimental to Procter & Gamble.
COUNT ONE BUSINESS DISPARAGEMENT
100. Plaintiffs incorporate as if fully restated herein their prior 

allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 99 of this Complaint.



101. Defendants knowingly and intentionally, uttered, published and/or 

allowed to be uttered or published the foregoing false, malicious and non-

privileged statements concerning Procter & Gamble and Procter & Gamble's 

products.



102. At the time of the utterances and/or publications, Defendants knew of 

the falsity of the statements and/or acted with reckless disregard as to 

their falsity.



103. Defendants acted with ill will and intended to interfere in the 

economic interests of Procter & Gamble in an unprivileged fashion.



104. The utterance and/or publication of the false, malicious, non-

privileged statements by Defendants induced others not to conduct business 

with Procter & Gamble, and/or to cease purchasing Procter & Gamble's 

products, which proximately caused special damage, including but not limited 

to, loss of trade, lost sales, lost revenue, and harm to Procter & Gamble's 

reputation, goodwill and prestige and standing with consumers or customers 

and in the business community.
COUNT TWO DEFAMATION
105. Plaintiffs incorporate as if fully restated herein their prior allegations 

in Paragraphs 1 through 104 of this Complaint.



106. Defendants published or allowed to be published the false, malicious 

and non-privileged statements concerning Procter & Gamble, its executives 

and employees, and products.



107. The foregoing false statements concerning Procter & Gamble and/or its 

products are slanderous, libelous and/or defamatory. The foregoing false 

statements concerning Procter & Gamble and/or its products are, further, 

slanderous, libelous and/or defamatory per se. Defendants knowingly, 

intentionally and/or maliciously uttered or published such false and 

defamatory statements and/or allowed, permitted and/or acquiesced in the 

uttering or publication of such statements.



108. The false, malicious, non-privileged statements proximately caused harm 

and damage of Procter & Gamble's reputation, prestige and standing as well 

as Procter & Gamble's business and products.



109. As a proximate result of Defendants' conduct, Procter & Gamble has 

suffered damages in an amount of be determined at trial.



110. Defendants' conduct was undertaken in bad faith, was malicious and 

manifested a wanton disregard of, and/or reckless indifference towards, the 

rights of Procter & Gamble, thereby entitling Procter & Gamble to punitive 

or exemplary damages.
COUNT THREE SECTION 16.29 OF THE TEXAS BUSINESS & COMMERCE CODE INJURY TO BUSINESS REPUTATION OR TRADE NAME OR MARK
111. Plaintiffs incorporate as if fully restated herein their prior 

allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 110 of this Complaint.



112. Defendants knowingly and intentionally uttered, published and/or 

allowed to be published the aforesaid false and malicious 

Educational DVDs and Videos