IBJNews

Jury returns $2.2M judgment against Don Marsh

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A federal jury returned a $2.2 million judgment against iconic Marsh Supermarkets CEO Don Marsh late Friday, finding that he tapped corporate coffers for personal expenses.

The nine-member jury deliberated for about six hours before notifying the court that it had reached a verdict about 11 p.m.

Marsh had no comment on the verdict and didn't respond when U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker wished him "good luck" before adjourning the court.

Marsh Supermarkets filed a civil lawsuit against Marsh in April 2009, claiming he used the company as a personal checkbook to finance global travels and trysts with mistresses. His attorneys insisted the trips were business-related and within the bounds of his employment contract. Marsh countersued, saying the company had wrongfully halted severance payments, shorting him $2 million.

After a two-week civil trial, jury members found Marsh, 75, had commited breach of contract and fraud, but stopped short of delivering Marsh Supermarkets a total victory. Although the grocery chain had asked for $1.6 million to cover expenses and penalties related to an IRS audit that focused on Don Marsh's expenses, the jury awarded the company half that amount, saying it shared responsibility.

"We're pleased that [the jury] agreed with us in part," said Andrew McNeil, one of Don Marsh's attorneys.

The jury agreed with four of Marsh Supermarkets' eight breach-of-contract claims, ordering him to repay $1.4 million in unauthorized expenses. It did not award punitive damages.

Marsh Supermarkets was asking its former CEO for a total of about $5.6 million.

Judge Barker will rule separately on whether the company can recover the $2.2 million in severance it paid to Marsh.

Sun Capital Partners purchased the supermarket chain in September 2006 and directed it to file suit after an investigation into company finances uncovered what it considered lavish spending by the former CEO.

After Marsh Supermarkets sued him in federal court in 2009, he countersued, asserting the company improperly halted his post-retirement payouts in 2008 and owes him millions of dollars.

The jury denied his counterclaim.

Marsh showed no emotion as the verdict was read.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Did Don Really Lose?
    Did Don Marsh really lose? I don't think so. He had a jolly good time and plenty of ladies to spend lavishly on.
  • Always
    85% of these these things only serve to keep lawyers employed.. Kind of like our congress (mostly lawyers) pass laws to increase the demand for more lawyers.
  • nothing gained
    So Don Marsh took about two million dollars worth of improper benefits, and the company responded by cancelling his two million pension. Why not settle this matter out of court? The two sides basically broke even with the lawyers being the only ones who came out ahead.
    • Hmmm
      Who wants to bet Sun Capital conveniently forgets to include this as income on their 2013 tax return? Would be interesting to see if the broker who arranged the sale actually has a securities license, otherwise Sun could have rescinded the entire transaction.
    • What's the net?
      Unanswered, does Don get to keep the severence he had collected BEFORE Sun sued? Is this a $450,000 per mistress penalty? Really, the former shareholders of Marsh Supermarkets are the ones who got screwed!
    • Line breaks...
      ...are apparently stripped from comments, I see. Nice.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. In reality, Lilly is maintaining profit by cutting costs such as Indiana/US citizen IT workers by a significant amount with their Tata Indian consulting connection, increasing Indian H1B's at Lillys Indiana locations significantly and offshoring to India high paying Indiana jobs to cut costs and increase profit at the expense of U.S. workers.

    2. I think perhaps there is legal precedence here in that the laws were intended for family farms, not pig processing plants on a huge scale. There has to be a way to squash this judges judgment and overrule her dumb judgement. Perhaps she should be required to live in one of those neighbors houses for a month next to the farm to see how she likes it. She is there to protect the people, not the corporations.

    3. http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/engineer/facts/03-111.htm Corporate farms are not farms, they are indeed factories on a huge scale. The amount of waste and unhealthy smells are environmentally unsafe. If they want to do this, they should be forced to buy a boundary around their farm at a premium price to the homeowners and landowners that have to eat, sleep, and live in a cesspool of pig smells. Imagine living in a house that smells like a restroom all the time. Does the state really believe they should take the side of these corporate farms and not protect Indiana citizens. Perhaps justifiable they should force all the management of the farms to live on the farm itself and not live probably far away from there. Would be interesting to investigate the housing locations of those working at and managing the corporate farms.

    4. downtown in the same area as O'malia's. 350 E New York. Not sure that another one could survive. I agree a Target is needed d'town. Downtown Philly even had a 3 story Kmart for its downtown residents.

    5. Indy-area residents... most of you have no idea how AMAZING Aurelio's is. South of Chicago was a cool pizza place... but it pales in comparison to the heavenly thin crust Aurelio's pizza. Their deep dish is pretty good too. My waistline is expanding just thinking about this!

    ADVERTISEMENT