Enhanced Athlete Refuses to Settle with Nutrition Distribution and Wins

There are hundreds of food product companies in the U.S., but Nutrition Distribution has become well-known in the industry, for the wrong reasons. The company’s name has not been the subject of newspaper headlines in the past for the kind of reasons you would think. It is known more for being a perennial plaintiff than for its determination in pursuit of the goals and aspirations for which its owners established it. In October 2017, Enhanced Athlete, a food and wellness product company based in Wyoming became the serial litigant’s latest target.

 

Nutrition Distribution, LLC versus Enhanced Athlete

 

The case is the most recent in a series of false advertisement cases where Nutrition Distribution was the plaintiff. In fact, this company has filed 70 lawsuits against its competitors so far, and it remains to be seen who will be the next victim. In each instance, the plaintiff argued that the defendant’s “false” advertising of its products led to a decline in its sales numbers. It applied to have a court order issued against Enhanced Athlete.

 

All of the Cases are Malicious Lawsuits

 

Some of the businesses Nutrition Distribution has sued have chosen to settle out of court. However, Enhanced Athlete refused to back down; they decided to fight, and they won. They claimed that the plaintiff was in the business of instituting malicious lawsuits meant to force food and wellness product companies into out-of-court settlements. The plaintiff hoped to receive a small payment from each defendant. Apparently, Nutrition Distribution reasoned that no competitor would want costly and time-consuming court battles.

 

The Plaintiff Fails to Show that They Suffered Harm

 

In these kinds of cases, the plaintiff needs to show the court that they have suffered harm. They must demonstrate that the loss they have suffered is a direct result of the actions of the defendant. But the lawyers from Enhanced Athlete successfully argued that the claims made were without merit. Nutrition Distribution did not demonstrate how they had suffered harm; they were unable to prove that the drop in sales they complained about resulted from the misleading promotion of their competitors’ products.

 

Enhanced Athlete Carries the Day

 

The California-based federal court that heard the case refused to issue a court order. The court ruled in favor of Enhanced Athlete, a decision that frustrated the plaintiff’s efforts at slowing down the defendant. The defendant through their attorney successfully showed the court that the plaintiff’s evidence had always failed to establish a cause and effect.

 

The plaintiff failed to link the declining sales and the competition’s advertising. One would have expected Nutrition Distribution to have gone back to the drawing board after the very first defeat. One would have thought they would not have filed a case whose facts and circumstances were similar to the previous ones where the court had ruled in the defendants’ favor. But then they would not be perennial plaintiffs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *