Like the Hanrahan lawsuit, this suit alleges that high level Amway distributors are engaging in fraud and racketeering related to their highly profitable motivational "tools" businesses. The Touchton suit goes further in alleging that the Touchton's upline attempted to "squeeze them out" by selling Amway and non-Amway products to their downline, and also disparaging them to their downline and upline…practices described to me by other ex-distributors and discussed by Steven Butterfield in his book Amway: The Cult of Free Enterprise. It also alleges that the "tools" business constitutes an illegal pyramid scheme, something that Rich Devos himself admitted more than ten years ago (see Directly Speaking article).
IN THE STATE COURT OF RICHMOND COUNTY
DON TOUCHTON AND              )
			SUE ELLEN  TOUCHTON,          )
			                              )
			             PLAINTIFFS,      )
			                              )     CIVIL ACTION FILE
			             VS.              )     NO.: 96-RC5C-264
			                              )
			AMWAY CORPORATION; DEXTER     )
			YAGER, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A )
			YAGER ENTERPRISES; HAL GOOCH  )
			AND SUSAN GOOCH;   AND  SAM   )
			FLANERY AND JACALYN FLANERY,  )
			                              )
			             DEFENDANTS.      )
			 
                                            COMPLAINT
			 
        NOW COME PLAINTIFFS, DON AND SUE ELLEN TOUCHTON, and for
			their complaint against Defendants show as follows:
			 
                                     INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT
			 
        1. Plaintiffs are citizens and residents of the State
			of Georgia.
        2. Defendant Amway Corporation ("Amway") is a Michigan
			corporation, which is engaged in the manufacture, distribution, and
			sale of Amway products, and the promotion of Amway distributorships
			within the state of Georgia. Amway ' s registered agent for service
			of process is C. T. Corporation Systems at 12 O1 Peachtree Street
			N. E., Atlanta, Georgia 30361.
        3. Defendant Dexter Yager, individually and D/B/A Yager
			Enterprises ("Yager"), is a distributor of Amway products who is
			involved in the promotion of Amway distributorships, the
			distribution of Amway products, the production and distribution of
			motivational materials for use by Amway distributors, the sale of
			motivational materials to Amway distributors, and the organization
			of motivational rallies for attendance by Amway distributors.
			Yager may be served at 12201 Steel Creek Road, Charlotte,
			North Carolina 28273.
        4. Defendants Hal and Susan Gooch (collectively
			"Gooch") are residents of the state of North Carolina and are
			distributors of Amway products who are involved in the promotion
			of Amway distributorships, the distribution of Amway products, the
			production and distribution of motivational materials for use by
			Amway distributors, the sale of motivational materials to Amway
			distributors, and the organization of motivational rallies for
			attendance by Amway distributors. Gooch may be served at 6 Curtis
			Court, Thomasville, North Carolina 27360.
        5. Defendants Sam and Jacalyn Flanery (collectively
			"Flanery") are residents of the state of North Carolina, and are
			distributors of Amway products who are involved in the promotion
			of Amway distributorships, the distribution of Amway products, the
			distribution of motivational materials for use by Amway
			distributors, and the organization of motivational rallies for
			attendance by Amway distributors. Flanery may be served at 400
			Sugar Loaf Road, Hendersonville, North Carolina 28792.
			 
                                     JURISDICTION AND VENUE
			 
        6. Defendant Amway, a Michigan corporation, is
			registered and authorized to transact business in Georgia, and
			transacted business out of which the subject cause of action arose,
			with Plaintiffs in Richmond County, Georgia. All other Defendants
			are subject to the jurisdiction of this court under the Georgia
			Long-Arm Statute, in that they are non-residents of the State of
			Georgia who have (a) transacted, and continue to transact business,
			and have engaged in purposeful activity within the State of
			Georgia, and that the claims of Plaintiffs arise out of said
			business and activity, (b) committed a tortious act or acts or
			omissions within Georgia against Plaintiffs, and/or (c) committed
			a tortious injury or injuries in Georgia against Plaintiffs caused
			by acts or omissions outside of Georgia, and have regularly done
			or solicited business in Georgia, engaged in a persistent course
			of conduct within Georgia and derived substantial revenue from
			goods used or consumed in Georgia. Furthermore, certain of the
			actions of all Defendants here complained of were transacted in
			Richmond County, Georgia, and venue properly lies in this court.
			 
                                        FACTUAL STATEMENT
			 
        7. Amway manufactures a wide variety of consumer
			household products which it sells nationwide through hundreds of
			thousands of distributors, many of whom are in Georgia.
        8. The Amway sales plan is a marketing scheme, whereby
			any purchase or sale of Amway goods by a distributor financially
			benefits not only Amway, but also those Amway distributors who
			qualify and occupy levels in the Amway distributorship network
			higher than that of the selling distributor. In Amway parlance,
			those persons who occupy positions below a distributor in his
			branch of the network are called the distributor's "downline".
			Those persons who occupy positions above a distributor in his
			branch of the network are called the distributor's "upline". In
			order to earn significant profits as an Amway distributor, one must
			develop a sizeable downline organization by recruiting and
			sponsoring other distributors into the Amway sales organization.
        9. Amway sells, distributes, or otherwise supplies for
			a valuable consideration, goods through independent agents or
			distributors at different levels, wherein such distributors may
			recruit other distributors and wherein commissions, cross-
			commissions, bonuses, refunds, discounts, dividends, or other
			considerations in the program are or may be paid as a result of the
			sale of such goods or services or the recruitment, actions, or
			performances of additional participant distributors.
        10. Defendant Yager occupies a position at the top of
			his own vast Amway distributorship network. The Amway
			distributorship network Defendant Yager runs is comprised of tens
			of thousands of downline distributors and, upon information and
			belief, earns millions of dollars annually through his Amway
			business organizations.
        11. In September 1986, Plaintiffs became Amway
			distributors Within the Yager organization, by entering into a
			distributorship agreement with Amway, whereby they acquired the
			right to sponsor new Amway distributors, and to sell Amway products
			primarily to their sponsored distributors.
        12. Defendants Gooch and Flanery are Amway distributors
			within the Yager organization upline of the Plaintiffs.
        13. The success of the individual Defendants herein is
			integral to the success of Defendant Amway. Amway directly
			benefits financially from the sponsorship of each Amway distributor
			within the Yager organization, and from the sale of Amway products
			to each Amway distributor within the Yager organization.
        14. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery have created
			their own businesses that publish and/or distribute motivational
			materials, such as books and audio-cassette tapes, and that
			organize and promote motivational rallies for Amway distributors
			throughout the United States. Through these businesses, Defendants
			Yager, Gooch, and Flanery sell vast quantities of motivational
			materials to their respective downline distributors and hold
			rallies throughout the United States that their downline
			distributors must pay to attend.
        15. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery derive a
			substantial portion of their incomes from the sale of non-Amway
			motivational materials to persons in their downlines and from the
			money earned through their motivational rallies.
        16. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery regularly
			represented or caused to be represented to Plaintiffs that their
			success as Amway distributors was contingent upon the purchase of
			motivational materials published and/or distributed by Defendants
			Yager, Gooch, and Flanery, and attendance at meetings sponsored by
			them, and that without such materials and attendance at meetings,
			Plaintiffs would be unable to build and maintain successful Amway
			distributorships. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery further
			represented or caused to be represented to Plaintiffs that they
			should purchase only those motivational materials produced and/or
			distributed by Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery.
        17. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery further
			represented to Plaintiffs that they should purchase a weekly supply
			of Defendants' motivational audio tapes through a tape-of-the-week
			program that Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery described as the
			"standing order" tape program ("S.O.T."), and, moreover, Defendants
			represented that such weekly purchases of Defendants' audio tapes
			were essential to Plaintiffs' success as Amway distributors.
        18. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery further
			represented to Plaintiffs that their paid regular attendance at the
			motivational rallies organized and promoted by Defendants was
			essential to Plaintiffs' success as Amway distributors.
        19. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery further
			represented to plaintiffs that the only way plaintiffs could be
			successful Amway distributors was to buy motivational and
			promotional materials prepared by said Defendants, to pay to attend
			meetings and conferences sponsored by them, and to recruit and
			sponsor other distributors (and convince them to buy tapes and to
			pay to attend conferences); and most importantly, to avoid wasting
			time trying to develop retail sales, which they continually
			stressed were unimportant.
        20. Defendants Gooch and Flanery further represented to
			Plaintiffs that despite anything the Amway organization might say,
			the Amway rules and regulations were irrelevant and should be
			disregarded, and that Amway would not dare interfere with the way
			the Yager organization was run, because Yager could always pull his
			downline organization out of Amway, which would significantly harm
			Amway.
        21. In fact, the motivational materials produced and/or
			distributed by Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery and the
			motivational rallies organized and promoted by Defendants Yager,
			Gooch, and Flanery were unnecessary to the success of Amway
			distributors, which fact was well known to Defendants Yager, Gooch
			and Flanery, and Plaintiffs lost money as Amway distributors.
        22. At all times relevant hereto, Amway was aware that
			the aforesaid misrepresentations regarding Defendants Yager, Gooch,
			and Flanery's motivational materials and motivational rallies were
			being made to Amway distributors, and that in practice, sales of
			such materials within the Yager organization were consistently
			being conducted in violation of Amway's rules, including without
			limitation, Section B, Rule 4. It was in Amway's economic self-
			interest to permit such misrepresentations and rules violations to
			continue, and although Amway has been aware of such practices for
			years, Amway has never terminated the distributorships of
			Defendants Yager, Gooch, or Flanery, or made any credible effort
			to halt their practices in violation of Amway's rules.
        23. In reliance upon the misrepresentations of
			Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery, Plaintiffs purchased large
			quantities of Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery's motivational
			materials and attended Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery's
			motivational rallies as recently as early 1993.
        24. In addition to the foregoing, Flanery, with the
			knowledge of Gooch, and ultimately Yager and Amway, engaged in a.
			regular practice of interfering with Plaintiffs' downlines, cutting
			out the Plaintiffs from the distributorship scheme.
        25. On various occasions, Defendants herein sold or
			caused the sale of Amway and non-Amway products directly to
			Plaintiff's downline distributors, thereby interfering with
			Plaintiffs' distributorship relationships.
        26. On numerous occasions Defendants Gooch and Flanery
			disparaged Plaintiffs to Plaintiffs' downline distributors and
			Plaintiffs' upline, in an effort to interfere with Plaintiffs'
			downline distributorship relationships, and to isolate Plaintiffs
			from upline support.
			 
COUNT I
                            VIOLATION OF O.C.G.A. §10-1-410, ET SEQ.,
			                         RELATING TO MULTIILEVEL DISTRIBUTION COMPANIES
			 
        27. The allegations contained in paragraphs numbered "1"
			through "26" are incorporated here in by reference.
        28. Defendants either constitute, operate, and/or
			directly or indirectly participate in the operation of a multilevel
			marketing program, within the meaning of Georgia law.
        29. Defendants Yager, Flanery and Gooch, with the
			knowledge of Amway, manage and/or participate in an organization
			(the Yager organization) wherein, through the persuasive and
			coercive actions of said individual defendants, the financial gains
			to the participants are primarily dependent upon the continued,
			successive recruitment of other participants, and where sales of
			Amway goods to non-participants are not required as a condition
			precedent to realization of such financial gains.
        30. Defendants have failed to comply with the
			requirements of O.C.G.A. §10-1-413, and have engaged in practices
			prohibited under O.C.G.A. §§ 10-1-411 and 10-1-414, and
			accordingly, are guilty of unfair or deceptive acts or practices
			in the conduct of consumer transactions.
        31. Plaintiffs have been injured in their persons and
			property by the acts of Defendants in violation of O.C.G.A. §10-
			1-410, et seq., and Plaintiffs are entitled to recover their
			general as well as exemplary damages occasioned by such injuries
			against all Defendants, jointly and severally.
        32. Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of three times
			their actual damages under O.C.G.A. §10-1-399(c), as well as
			reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses of litigation under
			O.C.G.A. §10-1-399 (d).
			 
COUNT II
                          VIOLATION OF THE GEORGIA RACKETEER INFLUENCED
			                             AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS ACT (AGAINST
			                              DEFENDANTS YAGER, GOOCH AND FLANERY)
			 
        33. The allegations contained in paragraphs numbered "l"
			through "32" are incorporated herein by reference.
        34. The actions of Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery
			alleged above, constitute racketeering activity within the meaning
			of O.C.G.A. §16-14-3, in that they constitute a violation of 18
			U.S.C. §§ 1343 and 1341, wire and mail fraud. Defendants Yager,
			Gooch and Flanery's participation in the affairs of the enterprise
			consisted of their guiding, managing, directing or otherwise
			exercising some control over the affairs of the enterprise.
Through acts of mail and wire fraud Defendants Yager, Gooch, and
			Flanery participated in the affairs of the RICO enterprise which
			was comprised of a large international corporation (Amway) and its
			vast network of hundreds of thousands of individual distributors.
			The cloak of legitimacy provided to Defendants Yager, Gooch, and
			Flanery by this seemingly legitimate enterprise afforded said
			Defendants access to and influence over huge numbers of Amway
			distributors, thus enabling Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery
			to exercise their scheme to defraud Plaintiffs and others through
			an illegal pyramid distributor scheme as described at length
			herein.
        35. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery's pattern of
			racketeering activity, which consisted of mail and wire fraud, was
			perpetrated through direct telephone communications, the Amvox
			Telephone Voice Mail System, and the mails, pursuant to and for the
			purpose of executing Defendants' scheme to defraud Plaintiffs and
			others by communicating false and fraudulent information, including
			but not limited to:
        a) statements that fraudulently represented that
			Plaintiffs' success as Amway distributors was contingent upon
			purchasing substantial quantities of the motivational materials
			produced and/or distributed by Defendants Yager, Gooch, and
			Flanery; and
        b) statements that fraudulently represented that
			Plaintiffs' success as Amway distributors was contingent upon
			attending motivational rallies organized and promoted by Defendants
			Yager, Gooch, and Flanery.
        36. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery conspired and
			endeavored to conduct or participate in, directly or indirectly,
			the said enterprises through a pattern of racketeering activity,
			and to acquire money.
        37. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery conspired and
			endeavored to acquire or maintain directly or indirectly, an
			interest in said enterprises and to conduct or participate,
			directly or indirectly, in said enterprises through a pattern of
			racketeering activity, in order to acquire money.
        38. Plaintiffs are persons injured by reason of
			Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery's violation of O.C.G.A. §15-
			14-4, and are entitled to three times their actual damages
			sustained, as well as punitive damages and attorney fees.
			 
COUNT III
                                              FRAUD
			 
        39. The allegations contained in paragraphs numbered "1"
			through "38" are incorporated herein by reference.
        40. Defendants Yager, Gooch; and Flanery made or caused
			to be made knowing and fraudulent misrepresentations to Plaintiffs
			at the time they were recruited and sponsored to become Amway
			distributors by misrepresenting the nature of the business
			opportunity as being "the Amway system", when in fact, these
			Defendants were engaged in a systematic violation of the Amway
			rules, and were operating an illegal pyramid sales scheme for their
			own profit through the sales of motivational materials, and conduct
			of rallies.
        41. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery made or caused
			to be made knowing and continuing fraudulent misrepresentations as
			recently as early 1993 to Plaintiffs that the proper and only way
			to succeed in the Amway business was to put their full efforts into
			the sale and distribution of motivational materials produced by
			said Defendants, and into recruiting and sponsoring additional
			distributors to whom additional motivational materials would be
			sold, rather than into developing and expanding retail sales of
			Amway products.
        42. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery made or caused
			to be made knowing and continuing fraudulent misrepresentations as
			recently as early 1993 to Plaintiffs that their success as Amway
			distributors was contingent upon the purchase of motivational
			materials produced and/or distributed by Defendants, and upon
			Plaintiffs' inducement of their downline to do the same.
        43. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery made or caused
			to be made knowing and continuing fraudulent misrepresentations as
			recently as early 1993 to Plaintiffs that their success as Amway
			distributors was contingent upon attending their motivational
			rallies, and upon Plaintiffs' inducement of their downline to do
			the same.
        44. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery failed to make
			to Plaintiffs and others various disclosures required under Georgia
			law, including without limitation O.C.G.A. §10-1-410, et seq.
        45. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery made or caused
			to be made the aforesaid and above-described misrepresentations of
			material fact and failed to disclose the aforesaid material facts,
			intending that the Plaintiffs become and continue as Amway
			distributors, not for the purposes of generating Defendants'
			profits solely through the "Amway system", but rather for the
			purpose of generating larger profits for these Defendants from
			their illegal pyramid selling scheme which was prohibited by the
			Amway rules.
        46. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery made or caused
			to be made the aforesaid misrepresentations of material fact
			intending that Plaintiffs purchase Defendants Yager, Gooch, and
			Flanery's motivational materials, and expend money to attend their
			motivational rallies, and induce their downline to do the same, in
			the fraudulently induced belief that such expenditures were
			necessary to Plaintiffs' success as Amway distributors.
        47. Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery made or caused
			to be made the aforesaid misrepresentations intending that as soon
			as profits from motivational materials and rallies were generated
			through Plaintiffs' efforts, they would have the ability to cut
			Plaintiffs out so Plaintiffs could not participate in the profits
			from the sales of such materials, and said Defendants could deal
			directly with their downline.
        48. But for the aforesaid fraudulent representations,
			upon which Plaintiffs justifiably relied to their detriment, and
			but for the aforesaid omissions of material facts, Plaintiffs would
			not have entered into or maintained their Amway distributorship.
        49. But for the aforesaid misrepresentations of material
			fact, upon which Plaintiffs justifiably relied to their detriment,
			Plaintiffs would not have purchased substantial quantities of
			Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery's motivational materials and
			would not have expended significant amounts of money traveling to
			and attending Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery's motivational
			rallies, which motivational materials and rallies were in fact
			unnecessary and actually detrimental to Plaintiffs' success as
			Amway distributors.
        50. Plaintiffs, in justifiable reliance upon Defendants
			Yager, Gooch, and Flanery's fraudulent misrepresentations, were
			damaged in an amount in excess of $100,000.00, in that Plaintiffs
			entered into and continued to operate their unprofitable Amway
			distributorship, in the process expending significant amounts of
			money on unwanted and unnecessary motivational materials and
			rallies. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover from Defendants Yager,
			Gooch, and Flanery compensatory damages, punitive damages, costs
			and attorney fees, and such other relief as this court deems just.
        51. At the time Plaintiffs were recruited to become
			Amway distributors, and throughout their time as active
			distributors, they made their decision to become and continue as
			distributors based in large part upon their reliance on the
			representations made and published by Defendant Amway in various
			introductory and promotional materials, concerning the "Amway
			System", including the Amway rules and regulations and Amway's
			alleged commitment to enforcing them, when in fact Amway knew that
			the Yager organization had been and continued to operate in
			violation of the rules promulgated by Amway, which Amway chose not
			to enforce, and that what Plaintiffs were actually investing in was
			not the "Amway System", but the Yager organization, an improper
			pyramid scheme.
        52. Amway knew or should have known that a large portion
			of the activity taking place within the Yager organization was in
			contravention of Amway's rules, and was in fact something entirely
			different from the "plan" it has continued marketing.
        53. Because of the enormous profits generated for it by
			the Yager organization, and the fear of the possibility of that
			organization leaving the Amway system, Amway has deliberately
			chosen not to enforce its rules against such improper practices,
			has denied their existence, and continues to publish materials
			extolling the virtues of the Amway System in order to entice more
			persons to become distributors.
        54. Amway's representations contained in its literature
			prepared for the purpose of enticing persons into becoming Amway
			distributors and its promotional materials concerning the Amway
			system and the rules and regulations supporting it fraudulently
			misrepresent the nature of the actual distribution system in
			practice.
        55. Plaintiffs justifiably relied upon Amway's
			fraudulent misrepresentations in becoming and continuing as Amway
			distributors, and said misrepresentations were the proximate cause
			of considerable damage to Plaintiffs.
			 
COUNT IV
                                       BREACH OF CONTRACT
			 
        56. The allegations contained in paragraphs numbered "1"
			through "55" are incorporated herein by reference.
        57. As more particularly described above, Plaintiffs
			entered into and continued in the renewal of a distributorship
			agreement with Defendant Amway based in significant part upon
			representations made to them concerning the Amway marketing system,
			including the rules and regulations promulgated by Amway.
        58. Amway's failure and refusal after notice of numerous
			violations, to enforce the rules and regulations promulgated by it
			to govern its marketing system, and purporting to preclude improper
			actions against Plaintiffs by Plaintiffs' upline distributors,
			including Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery, which actions were
			in direct violation of Amway's rules and regulations, constitutes
			a breach by Amway of its contract with Plaintiffs, as a direct
			result of which Plaintiffs suffered considerable economic loss, for
			which Amway should be held liable.
			 
COUNT V
                                 TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE (AGAINST
			                              DEFENDANTS YAGER, GOOCH, AND FLANERY)
			 
        59. The allegations contained in paragraphs numbered "1"
			through "58" are incorporated herein by reference.
        60. In direct contravention of the rules promulgated by
			Defendant Amway, the enforcement of which Plaintiffs by contract
			had a vested interest, Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery
			tortiously interfered with Plaintiffs' contractual relationship
			with Amway, by selling both Amway and non-Amway products directly
			and without Plaintiffs' permission, to Plaintiffs' downline
			distributors. Defendant Flanery, in particular, sold Amway and
			non-Amway products to Plaintiffs' downline on numerous occasions,
			even though those downline distributors had access to products
			directly from Amway. Defendant Flanery also sold motivational
			materials produced by corporations or organizations controlled or
			operated by Defendants Yager and Gooch to Plaintiffs' downline.
			 
        61. In direct contravention of the rules promulgated by
			Defendant Amway, Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery tortiously
			interfered with Plaintiffs' contractual relationship with Amway,
			by contacting Plaintiffs' downline distributors for the purpose of
			making false and damaging statements to them about Plaintiffs, of
			instructing them to disregard retail sales (except for personal
			consumption) and concentrate instead on promotional functions and
			materials, and recruitment and sponsorship of new distributors.
        62. Plaintiffs had a legitimate, continuing expectation
			of business relationships with their downline distributors premised
			upon the "Amway System". Defendants ~ interference with those
			relationships has resulted in actual damages suffered by
			Plaintiffs.
        63. In committing the acts to which reference is made
			in this Complaint, Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery have acted
			willfully, maliciously, wantonly, oppressively, intentionally,
			knowingly, fraudulently, in bad faith, and with reckless disregard
			of the consequences, and with such entire want of care as raises
			the presumption of conscious indifference to the consequences, such
			as to entitle Plaintiffs to punitive damages under Georgia law,
			including O.C.G.A. §51-12-5.1, and further such punitive damages
			are not subject to limitation provided by O.C.G.A. §51-12-5.1(g),
			because Defendants acted with a specific intent to cause harm to
			Plaintiffs.
        64. In acting as alleged in the preceding paragraph,
			Defendants Yager, Gooch, and Flanery have acted in bad faith, have
			been stubbornly litigious, and have caused Plaintiffs unnecessary
			trouble and expense, whereby Plaintiffs are entitled to recover
			their expenses of litigation, including reasonable attorney fees.
			 
                                        PRAYER FOR RELIEF
			 
        WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand trial by jury on evidence may
			show, treble damages pursuant to Georgia statute as alleged all counts,
			and judgment for money damages against all defendants jointly and
			severally, in such amount for actual damages as the above,
			punitive damages sufficient to deter Defendants from such actions
			in the future, and reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses of
			litigation, together with all costs of court and such other and
			further relief as the court may deem equitable and just.
This 28th day of March, 1996.
                            E. L. CLARK SPEESE
			                            Georgia State Bar No.: 670720
                            ROBERT C. THRELKELD
			                            Georgia State Bar No.: 710760
                            ATTORNIES FOR PLAINTIFFS
			                            699 Broad St., #1500
			                            Augusta, Georgia 30901-1454
			                            (706) 722-7543
OF COUNSEL:
WARLICK, TRITT & STEBBINS