On Friday, I wrote about an absolutely ridiculous amended complaint filed by a group of "ambulance chasers" looking to score a quick buck. Outrageous claims were made in the re-filed amendment which stated YTB had perpetrated an illegal pyramid scheme that represents the largest fraud in the history of the State of Illinois! It further stated YTB was one of the largest frauds in this history of this nation, exceeded only by the likes of Bernie Madoff’s illegal Ponzi scheme.

Critics and Anti-MLM Zealots flocked to message boards, blogs, and trade publications to celebrate the new filing, with hopes that big bad YTB would soon perish from the industry. One “professional” went as far as calling the amended document “powerful” on his blog. The post even claimed Counsel had learned a thing or two from California just to make the claim stick. Questions were also raised if Coach would be sharing a cell with Mr. Madoff as a closing chapter of his new book “The Fourth Quarter”.

After reading the amended filing, I was amused regarding the terminology used by Counsel in the complaint. I pointed out that words like “failed”, “corrected”, “deficiency”, “amending”, “incorrectly”, and “realized after 100 hours of arguing” placed doubt if this amendment had teeth or substance. If the first filing was riddled with errors, how was it right now?

I spent part of my weekend discussing with other Director’s and TSO’s which prompted a hardy laugh over YTB’s ability to steal from other Brick and Mortar Travel Agencies putting them out of business. We also questioned how anyone could think that 4 months would be enough time to effectively work either an MLM opportunity or Travel Business.

Critics also went round and round this past weekend, with their own illusions surrounding this amended complaint. The self proclaimed MLM expert was once again (as he and other Zealots have always been) incapable of understanding any perspective other than their own. After a very creative play with my words in Fridays article, the attention was placed back on YTB and my beliefs. By doing this, it raised the same question that has been asked of me many times over the last year.

Can I have a “warm fuzzy” concerning the legal actions brought against YTB?

I responded in part with the following comment:

I do have a warm fuzzy and have enjoyed how our legal system is making everyone cross their T’s and dot it’s I’s. Like the California legal process, the process in Illinois not only points out but apparently knows what the law is. While neither claim filed in each state enjoys the same luxury you have here on the internet, I know that their claims, unlike you, are being held accountable to prove the accusations made in regard to actual law.

We finally found a system and process that knows how to read, comprehend, and logically work through things in order to set the record straight.

While it’s taking some time, and we have to endure you’re idiosyncrasies with words, phobias, and obsession with YTB, much has already been brought to light to show the truth.

Little did I realize when I wrote that response to John Frenaye, how quickly the Court would respond.

I mentioned how humorous I found the accusations made in this amended filing. Please understand, that I’ve been dealing with critics for some time. I have come to the conclusion that correcting or educating any of these dolts is a fairy tale. While I could get upset, frustrated, or angry with them for ignoring simple, straight forward facts that I’ve actually experienced to be true, critics are no longer worth the amount of energy.

The Honorable G. Patrick Murphy who has been ruling in this class action complaint was not amused however. In fact, he essentially took the “ungainly monster of 39 pages containing 133 paragraphs“, rolled it into a cone, and used it as an instrument to whack Plaintiffs Counsel upside the back of their heads.

Judge Murphy filed his response on Monday to the amended complaint filed just last week on July 15th. It’s important to read this short response in full to feel the tone of this ruling which was penned by the District Judge. His words clearly vibrate frustration with Counsel concerning this amended filing “that likely does not pass muster under the familiar federal “notice pleading” standard”. The ruling also states that “a good deal of the flabbiness in the sprawling pleading before the Court consists of paragraphs of legal argument challenging the Court’s earlier dismissal of the ICFA claims of the non-Illinois Plaintiffs”.

There are many points of interest in this ruling that should be noted for everyone.

Although no responsive pleading has been filed in this case, the Court’s dismissal of the case pursuant to its June 5, 2009, order terminated Plaintiffs’ right to file an amended complaint as a matter of course. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a); Wheeler v. Pension Value Plan for Employees of Boeing Co., No. 06-cv-500-DRH, 2007 WL 2608875, at **3-4 (S.D. Ill. Sept. 6, 2007) (collecting cases). Accordingly, the Court will strike the First Amended Consolidated Complaint in this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) (authorizing a court sua sponte to strike “redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter” contained in a pleading). If Plaintiffs wish to file their First Amended Consolidated Complaint as it is pleaded currently, they will file a motion requesting leave of Court to do so. In their motion Plaintiffs should bear in mind that the Court’s order entered June 5, 2009, establishes the law of the case, from which the Court is unlikely to depart absent a showing of compelling reasons to do so.

While I’m certain some will continue to argue this point, the amended filing was not the least bit “powerful” but instead exposed for what it really was by the Court. Redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matters may work for some on the internet via the blogs and forums populated by a few critics. When it comes to a Court of Law, you should present some sort of substance to an individual who obviously knows the law. Since none was found, the amended complaint was kick back out and exposed what it really is.

A big ol’ pile of horse dung.

While some spend a vast amount of time twisting and spinning every move YTB makes based on stereotypes and myths surrounding pyramid schemes and scams on the internet, a Court of Law is clearly a different story.

As a general rule the Court is not fond of “ill-founded requests for reconsideration of matters previously decided,” given that such requests “needlessly take the court’s attention from current matters and visit inequity upon opponents who, prevailing in an earlier proceeding, must nevertheless defend their position again and again.”

It’s sad to say, but it’s SO true. Critics never give up their position. For some, giving up or admitting wrong would shatter their very existence. Especially those who blog and post their dribble day after day. You also need to remember that because both the California complaint that took almost a year to settle, and now the new light of this ruling regarding the Class Action, each day that passed without a resolution added validation of their illusions. The words “gigantic pyramid scheme” still ringing in their ears.

If you say it enough times, it’s got to be true…right? Rex Carr said it, and they’re the best from what we’ve been told.

Here’s one last statement in the ruling from the Court. I want you to read this and take it to heart. Going into the Convention which is now just days away, we as a company need to have this same attitude towards those that are attacking and slandering YTB and it’s members.

Put another way, the Court does not intend to spend a great deal more judicial time than it already has spent in hashing over with Plaintiffs and their counsel the matter of whether under the circumstances of this case non-residents of Illinois are entitled to maintain claims under the ICFA. Parties aggrieved by the Court’s rulings always have the option of seeking review of those rulings in a higher court at an appropriate time. So long as they are in this Court, however, litigants and their counsel do well not to treat the Court’s rulings “as mere first drafts, subject to revision and reconsideration at a litigant’s pleasure[.]”

Remember, this isn’t a journalist, a blogger, or an anonymous poster we know only as a screen name. This court filing and it’s view is indeed valid. When it comes to actual law surrounding the allegations and claims regarding YTB, we now have something we as a company can use to combat the very small but obnoxiously loud cult of critics. They desperately want to see an end to YTB based on their illusions and will gravitate and attach to any other illusion similar, regardless of any verification of fact or documentation.

Personally, I find the document filed by the Court pure poetry. It’s refreshing and energizing to see someone with this level of expertise and stature validate what I’ve been saying about critics for years. A very valuable score in the pursuit of truth, enlightenment, and justice.

To the Honorable G. Patrick Murphy:

With all the sincerity, gratitude, and humility I can find, I want to thank you for your swift and decisive response concerning the recent ill-founded amendment filed in your Court. Thank you for protecting my business and thousands of others who not only appreciate YTB for what it truly is, but admire and respect the Founders who have created it.

In addition thank you for exposing the outrageous claims for what they truly are. Ill-conceived, and defective perceptions regarding a company and model that has withstood the test of time.

PS - If you're involved with YTB, sign up for our FREE Newsletter. As a Website Owner or Website Seller, we'll keep you up to date with all the latest news, acquisitions, and developments with YTB.

PPS - Subscribe to the Just Picture It Now RSS feed, (including e-mail) for all the latest posts and updates found right here!

Doug & Ronda Bauknight AKA: TravelPro Travel Agent / Networker Phone: 678.458.5812

Learn How To Become A Travel Agent

Book Your Travel & Vacations With

Do You ZamZuu?

TSO #588629

Tags: Anti-MLM, Critics, John Frenaye, YTB Illinois Class Action, YTB Lawsuit

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 21st, 2009 at 7:00 am and is filed under John Frenaye, MLM, MLM Myths, Network Marketing, YTB Illinois Class Action, YTB Lawsuit, YTB National Convention. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.