Jurimatic by Exlitem

Maine Lobster Fraud Case Ends with $5M Settlement Victory

Maine Lobster Fraud Case Ends with $5M Settlement Victory

A
Anmol Tiwari
January 13, 2025
Maine Lobster Fraud Case Ends with $5M Settlement Victory

Lobster 207 Llc vs. Pettegrow et al

Case Background

On December 4, 2019, Plaintiff Lobster 207, LLC, filed the lawsuit in the United States District Court, District of Maine, Bangor Division (Case number: 1:19cv552). This case, involving allegations of fraud and contract violation, was assigned to Judge Lance E. Walker and referred to Magistrate Judge Karen Frink Wolf. The lawsuit stemmed from claims of fraudulent activities and breach of contract by the defendants, including falsifying invoices, embezzlement, and violations of the non-compete and employment agreements. Lobster 207 sought legal remedy for the financial and operational damages caused by the defendant's misconduct, which included overpayments, misrepresentation of inventory, and the diversion of resources for personal gain.

Cause

In March 2017, Lobster 207, LLC, a cooperative of Maine lobstermen, purchased the wholesale lobster business of Trenton Bridge Lobster Pound, Inc. The business was owned by Anthony and Josette Pettegrow. The transaction was valued at $4 million. As part of the deal, the Pettegrows and their business were prohibited from competing in the wholesale lobster market until March 2020. Lobster 207 also hired Warren Pettegrow, the son of Anthony and Josette, as its CEO. Warren was hired to oversee operations and ensure compliance with the agreements. Despite these contractual obligations, Anthony, Josette, Warren, and other associates engaged in a series of fraudulent and deceptive schemes. They systematically exploited their access to Lobster 207’s operations and resources for personal enrichment. These activities included falsifying invoices, embezzling funds, and operating a competing wholesale lobster business under the guise of compliance. The defendants also sold lobsters to Lobster 207 at inflated prices, diverted inventory, and misrepresented essential details about the purchased business. The defendants used their established connections and inside knowledge of Lobster 207’s operations

Continue Reading This Article

Subscribe to access this article and our entire library of legal content.

Unlimited access to all articles
Expert legal analysis and insights
Downloadable resources and templates
Subscribe Now Login to Access

You've reached your free article limit for this month

Tags

breach of contract
unjust enrichment
contract violations
Fraud case
Lobster 207
fraud case
lobster 207