Quixtar, Inc. v. Signature Management Team
©www.mlmlegal.com
Welcome to the MLMLegal.com Legal Cases Project. Here you will find hundreds of legal cases
in the fields of MLM, Direct Selling, Network Marketing, Multilevel Marketing and Party Plan.
The cases span federal and state courts as well as administrative cases from the FTC, FDA, IRS,
SEC, worker’s compensation, unemployment compensation, etc.
The intent of the MLMLegal.com Cases Project is strictly educational, and, to provide insight
into the legal issues and cases for an industry that spans the globe in upwards of 150 countries
with sales volume exceeding $100 billion and distributor involvement in the tens of millions.
MLMLegal.Com does not promote or endorse any company. MLMLegal.Com offers no value
judgments, either pro or con, regarding the companies profiled in legal cases.
Jeffrey A. Babener, principal attorney in the Portland, Oregon, law firm Babener & Associates,
and editor of www.mlmlegal.com, represents many of the leading direct selling companies in the
United States and abroad.
www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com
Quixtar, Inc. v. Signature Management Team
Case: Quixtar Inc. v. Signature Management Team (2010)
Subject Category: State Courts, Texas, Civil procedure
Agency Involved: Private civil suit
Court: Supreme Court of Texas
Case Synopsis: Quixtar terminated Signature Management Team's IBO contract. Both companies are
based in Michigan. Several of Signature Management Team's Individual Business Operators (IBOs) filed
lawsuits against Quixtar, including one in Texas. Quixtar moved for dismissal of the Texas case on the
doctrine of forum non conveniens, meaning that the forum is not convenient because the dispute was
between two Michigan companies, and Michigan, not Texas, is the proper forum.
Legal Issue: May a lawsuit proceed in a state in which downline distributors reside when the dispute is
actually between two non-resident companies?
Court Ruling: No. The Supreme Court of Texas found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in
allowing the forum non conveniens dismissal. Although ordinarily a resident plaintiff's choice of forum
deserves deference, a nonresident plaintiff's choice deserves less deference. The lawsuit was primarily a
dispute between Michigan companies and there was no reason to have the case heard in Texas.
