Dometic Corporation has filed a lawsuit against Tekmart International Inc., alleging fraudulent asset transfers to avoid paying over $1 million owed under a previous court judgment. The complaint was filed on January 28, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. Dometic accuses Tekmart International of engaging in deceptive practices to shield assets and evade financial obligations.
According to the lawsuit, Dometic claims that Tekmart International and its affiliate, Tekmart Integrated Manufacturing Services Ltd. (Tekmart HK), orchestrated a “classic shell game” by transferring all of Tekmart HK’s assets to Tekmart International shortly after a judgment was entered against them. This transfer allegedly occurred under the pretense of repaying a promissory note but was deemed fraudulent by Dometic. The plaintiff asserts that this maneuver allowed Tekmart HK to continue operations uninterrupted under a new corporate guise while avoiding payment obligations.
The complaint details several allegations supporting Dometic’s claim of fraudulence. Firstly, it is alleged that the value of the transferred assets far exceeded what was owed under the promissory note, with no proper market valuation conducted at the time. Additionally, Dometic argues that most assets were not secured under the note and that they held legal priority over these assets due to their recorded judgment lien. Furthermore, it is claimed that there was no arm’s length transaction as both companies shared common directors and affiliations.
Dometic also highlights how Tekmart International delayed enforcing any security rights for over a decade until immediately after the judgment was entered. Moreover, rather than maintaining possession of acquired assets, Tekmart International allegedly reincarnated Tekmart HK into another entity without formal documentation or consideration exchange.
As relief from these actions deemed fraudulent under Ohio law, Dometic seeks avoidance of asset transfers necessary to satisfy their claim against Tekmart HK per court judgment; attachment or garnishment against properties/assets belonging to Tekmart International; compensatory damages; punitive damages due to egregious conduct exhibited by defendants; attorney fees incurred during litigation process alongside other costs involved therein.
Representing Dometic Corporation are attorneys Marshal M. Pitchford from Dicaudo Pitchford & Yoder LLC based out Akron Ohio along with Erica Rutner affiliated with Cozen O’Connor located Fort Lauderdale Florida whose pro hac vice admission remains pending before court proceedings commence fully within jurisdiction presided over Judge PAB bearing Case ID number: 5:26-cv-00221-PAB
Source: 526cv00221_Dometic_Corporation_v_Tekmart_International_Inc_Complaint_Northern_District_Ohio.pdf
