Arizona v. Challenge , 151 Ariz. 20 (1986)

Arizona v. Challenge


The Court of Appeals held that summary judgment against Challenge was not proper. Summary judgment is proper only when there is no questing of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. Challenge had presented substantial evidence that the company did not require or pressure sales personnel to purchase the company's programs for personal use. This conflicted with evidence that the State put on contending that Challenge required each sales person to purchase the program before they would be authorized to sell it to others. Since this evidence was conflicting, and it was material to the issues in the complaint, summary judgment was improper in this instance and trial court ruling was reversed.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Published In: MLM / Direct Sales Updates, MLM Consulting / Network Marketing Updates

Reference Info:State, 9th Circuit, Arizona | United States

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Babener & Associates | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »


Welcome to MLM Legal - a valuable resource to the Multi-Level Marketing and Direct Sales Industry. ... View Profile »

Follow Babener & Associates:

Reporters on Deadline