The Morgan Martin It Works lawsuit ended with a consent judgment entered on February 6, 2025, after It Works Marketing, Inc. won a $1,036,131.39 arbitration award against former distributor Morgan McIntyre Martin, had that award confirmed in federal court in Florida, and then pursued the debt into Martin’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy in Tennessee.1UniCourt. It Works Marketing, Inc. v. Martin2PacerMonitor. It Works Marketing, Inc. v. Martin, Adversary Proceeding
The Arbitration Award and Federal Confirmation
The dispute arose under Martin’s distributor agreement with It Works Marketing, a Florida-based multi-level marketing company that sells weight-loss products through a network of independent distributors. Those agreements include a mandatory arbitration clause and a non-solicitation provision, typically lasting 24 months, that restricts departing distributors from recruiting the company’s other distributors or customers to a competitor.3Jus Mundi. It Works Marketing, Inc. v. Taylor Kaufmann, Final Arbitral Award The specific conduct It Works alleged against Martin is not detailed in the available court records, but the arbitration centered on breaches of that agreement.
On January 3, 2024, the arbitrator issued a final award of $1,036,131.39 in favor of It Works.1UniCourt. It Works Marketing, Inc. v. Martin4PacerMonitor. It Works Marketing, Inc. v. Martin, Complaint5Law360. It Works Marketing, Inc. v. Martin
Judge Scriven granted the motion to confirm on October 16, 2024, entering a final judgment for $1,036,131.39 and closing the case the same day. The available record does not show any additional interest or attorney’s fees added to that amount.1UniCourt. It Works Marketing, Inc. v. Martin
The Bankruptcy Filing and Nondischargeability Claim
Martin filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, docketed as Case No. 3:24-bk-02344. It Works responded on August 21, 2024, by filing an adversary complaint, Case No. 3:24-ap-90113, arguing that the $1,036,131.39 judgment should survive bankruptcy.2PacerMonitor. It Works Marketing, Inc. v. Martin, Adversary Proceeding
The company invoked two provisions of federal bankruptcy law: Section 523(a)(2), which covers debts obtained through false pretenses or fraud, and Section 523(a)(6), which covers debts resulting from willful and malicious injury. It Works also filed a motion for summary judgment on the same day as the complaint, supported by the arbitration award, the distributor agreement, and an injunction order from the earlier proceedings. Bankruptcy Judge Randal S. Mashburn noted the unusual timing and set the summary judgment motion for discussion at the initial pretrial conference. Martin, represented by attorney R. Payne, answered the complaint on September 23, 2024.6PacerMonitor. It Works Marketing, Inc. v. Martin, Answer to Complaint
Settlement and Consent Judgment
After a series of joint motions to continue the pretrial conference, Martin filed a motion for compromise and settlement on December 4, 2024.7PacerMonitor. It Works Marketing, Inc. v. Martin, Motion for Compromise and Settlement Judge Mashburn approved the settlement on February 5, 2025, and a consent judgment was entered the following day. The adversary proceeding was formally closed on February 27, 2025.2PacerMonitor. It Works Marketing, Inc. v. Martin, Adversary Proceeding
The specific terms are not public. The docket does not reflect how much Martin agreed to pay, whether any portion of the debt was treated as dischargeable, or what other conditions the parties agreed to.
Why It Works Pursued the Case
The action against Martin fits a broader pattern of It Works enforcing its distributor agreements against people who leave the company. In a parallel case, It Works pursued a former “Presidential Diamond” rank distributor, Taylor Kaufmann, alleging she had left for a competitor called Q Sciences and recruited roughly 200 of the company’s distributors to follow her. The arbitrator awarded $311,652 in lost profits, and the total judgment, including attorney’s fees, costs, and prejudgment interest, reached $816,275. That award was confirmed by the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida in January 2025, and It Works pursued a nondischargeability action against Kaufmann in bankruptcy as well.8U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of South Carolina. In Re Taylor Nicole Kaufmann, Opinion3Jus Mundi. It Works Marketing, Inc. v. Taylor Kaufmann, Final Arbitral Award
Because arbitration proceedings are confidential, most of what the company alleged against Martin, and what she argued in response, remains outside the public record. What the docket does show is the shape of the outcome: a seven-figure award, a federal judgment enforcing it, a bankruptcy filing that did not extinguish the claim, and a negotiated settlement on undisclosed terms.