Skip navigation

PRIVATE LABEL BROKERS GROUP ADDS TO WAKEFERN COMPLAINT

ELIZABETH, N.J. -- The Private Label Brokers Group has filed a supplemental complaint seeking monetary damages against Wakefern Food Corp. here and the firm it has hired to manage its private-label program.The supplemental complaint is the third legal action taken by the parties since Wakefern hired Fort Worth, Texas-based Marketing Management Inc. in late 1994 as a private-label consulting firm for

ELIZABETH, N.J. -- The Private Label Brokers Group has filed a supplemental complaint seeking monetary damages against Wakefern Food Corp. here and the firm it has hired to manage its private-label program.

The supplemental complaint is the third legal action taken by the parties since Wakefern hired Fort Worth, Texas-based Marketing Management Inc. in late 1994 as a private-label consulting firm for its ShopRite private labels.

Shortly after Wakefern and MMI teamed up, the Matawan, N.J.-based brokers group, concerned that Wakefern's competitors would follow its lead, sued both companies.

Wakefern and MMI responded with a since-dismissed third-party complaint against the brokerage firms and many of their officers. The dismissal prompted the broker group's latest action.

"We are adding a supplemental complaint for malicious prosecution against Wakefern and MMI. We are going to counterclaim against them for fees and costs and related charges," Galen Watje, president of Watje Firm Ltd., Bloomington, Minn., told SN.

"We are seeking monetary damages for all of our costs and attorneys' fees," he said, adding that a specific figure has not yet been set.

Officials at Wakefern declined comment, while officials at MMI could not be reached for comment.

In another development related to the case, Superior Court Presiding Chancery Judge John Boyle has decided he has jurisdiction to hear matters on alleged violations to the Robinson-Patman Act pertaining to the case.

Watje told SN the defendants had argued in January that Boyle could not consider arguments pertaining to Robinson-Patman because it is a federal statute and he is a state judge.

The case is scheduled to go to trial May 20.