Roderick Linton & Belfance False Doc In Shareholders Fight

Roderick Linton & Belfance False Doc In Shareholders Fight

In an unfolding legal drama, Plextrusions Inc., a renowned vinyl decking enterprise, finds itself at the heart of a contentious battle. Terry Sisler, the minority shareholder, has thrust the Ohio federal courts into a whirlwind of allegations and disputes. Central to this maelstrom is the law firm Roderick Linton & Belfance LLP, accused of introducing a “demonstrably false document” in court, representing the majority shareholder William R. Gribble.

Roderick Linton & Belfance False Doc In Shareholders Fight : Allegations of Conflict and Forgery

Sisler’s motion, a fiery arrow aimed at the judiciary’s heart, seeks to banish Roderick Linton & Belfance from the legal battlefield. He argues that the firm’s dual roles as Plextrusions’ corporate counsel and Gribble’s defender in their shareholder skirmish render them “necessary, conflicted witnesses.” The bone of contention? A “substitution forgery variant” of a pivotal agreement, allegedly smuggled into court filings.

Roderick Linton & Belfance False Doc In Shareholders Fight : Sisler’s Fight for Justice

Sisler, painting a portrait of betrayal and corporate intrigue, sued Gribble in April. He accuses Gribble of a Machiavellian scheme to oust him from Plextrusions, leveraging control for familial gain. Sisler’s narrative includes his vital role in founding the company and managing its operations, only to be unceremoniously dismissed on a day that should have been marked by celebration – his wedding anniversary.

Gribble’s Counter-Move: A Battle of Contracts and Counterclaims

In a twist of fate, Gribble, countering Sisler’s narrative, pointed to a 2012 “buy-sell agreement” – the disputed document at the heart of this epic. Gribble’s stance is that Sisler’s refusal to adhere to this agreement sparked the current legal inferno. Sisler, however, brands the document Gribble presented as a “transparent substitution forgery,” a specter haunting the halls of justice.

The Legal Quagmire: Disqualification and Dueling Narratives

Sisler’s accusations against Roderick Linton attorneys William G. Chris and Todd A. Mazzola add fuel to the fire. He alleges their casual dismissal of the document’s authenticity and inaction in amending Gribble’s counterclaim as signs of deeper malfeasance. The question now looms – can attorneys entangled in the very fabric of the dispute continue to represent their client?

Roderick Linton & Belfance False Doc In Shareholders Fight : Plextrusions at the Crossroads

Plextrusions, a beacon in the vinyl decking industry, is now a battleground for two shareholders locked in a legal duel. Sisler, with 49% of the common stock, and Gribble, holding a slight majority, have a history marred by disputes over product pricing and corporate direction.

Legal Representation: The Armies in the Fray

The legal gladiators for this high-stakes confrontation are lined up. Sisler’s banner is carried by Jeffrey S. Moeller, Christopher M. Corrigan, and Gregory D. Seeley of Seeley Savidge Ebert & Gourash Co. LPA. Gribble’s defense lies with William G. Chris and Todd A. Mazzola of Roderick Linton & Belfance LLP.