Tuesday, April 14, 2009

NEWS: Sex-toy company sues ex-employees

Sex-toy company sues ex-employees

Seven women violated non-compete deal, suit says

By Kimball Perry • kperry@enquirer.com • April 11, 2009

A Loveland company is suing seven women across the Midwest in a Hamilton County court, accusing them of violating a non-compete clause in their employment contract when they started selling for a competing sex toy company.

Pure Romance Parties Inc. filed the suit last week, suing women in Nebraska, Iowa and Michigan.

The suit accuses each woman of working for a competing company - Brown Bag Party - after signing an agreement in which they would sell Pure Romance products. That agreement also prevented them from working for a competitor for a year after they left Pure Romance.

As consultants, the women set up and/or host parties where Pure Romance products were exhibited and sold, earning a commission on the sales. The women apparently changed companies because the new company paid higher sales commissions.

The issue is a serious and potentially costly one for Pure Romance.

The company is worried about competition for the sex-toy and relationship-enhancement business. It did about $90 million in sales last year, up about 30 percent from two years before. The company's Web site notes it has 80 employees and tens of thousands of consultants.

The suit singles out one woman - Cheri Patterson of Omaha, Neb. - for several of the allegations.

Patterson hung up when called Friday, but an Internet search listed Patterson as a consultant with Pure Romance with a different telephone number in Omaha.

A message left on that number noted Patterson now is a consultant for Brown Bag Party.

Patterson's MySpace page lists her as a consultant for Brown Bag Party because "They Pay 50%," an apparent reference to sales commissions.

Founded in 1993 by Patty Brisben, Pure Romance - which uses a theme "Not Your Typical Party, Not Your Typical Consultants!" - products aren't sold in stores but at parties or by consultants hired by the company.

Calls and e-mails sent Friday to Pure Romance weren't immediately returned.

The case is next in court April 30 for a Pure Romance request for a restraining order preventing the women from competing against Pure Romance or contacting its clients and customers on behalf of other companies.

The suit seeks at least $50,000 in damages.

Source: http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090411/NEWS01/904110371





0 comments: