Advantage Service Company out of North Little Rock gave me one set of invoices, then altered the invoices and sent the altered set to me in response to a lawsuit I filed against Advantage and three Goodman entities that manufactured and marketed a faulty HVAC system.

Now Advantage Service Company is claiming the invoices were not altered. But, even if they were altered, so what?

Here is a copy of an “adoption” of a motion to dismiss filed by Advantage Service Company of Arkansas.

COMES Defendant, Advantage Service Holdings, LLC d/b/a Advantage Service
Company (“Advantage”), by and through its attorneys, Barber Law Firm PLLC, Notice
of Adoption of the Motion to Dismiss filed herein by Separate Defendants, Goodman
Manufacturing Company, L.P., Goodman Global, Inc., and Goodman Company, L.P.
(collectively referred to herein as “Goodman”), stating:

1. Pursuant to Ark. R. Civ. P. Rule 10, Advantage adopts all pertinent portions
   of the Motion to Dismiss and Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss filed on or about
   October 22, 2021, and the Amended Motion to Dismiss filed on or about October 28, 2021.
2. Upon review of Goodman’s arguments raised in their brief, the arguments
   equally apply to the Hammetts’ claims against Advantage. The Hammetts discuss at
   great length what she believes was invoices altered by Advantage. See Plaintiff’s First
   Am. Compl., pp. 38-45, ¶¶ 183-230. Advantage denies that any invoice was altered, but
   this denial is immaterial when addressing a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).
   Accepting the Hammetts’ allegations in the First Amended Complaint as true, the
   Hammetts fail to state a claim for fraud pursuant to Rule 9(b) of the Arkansas Rules of
   Civil Procedure. The Hammetts fail to state that a misrepresentation was made by
   Advantage, that there was any act by Advantage to induce any action from the
   Hammetts, and how the altered invoices damaged the Hammetts. Advantage is unaware
   and the Hammetts do not state how, assuming the facts in the Plaintiffs’ First Amended
   Complaint as true, the altered invoices damaged the Hammetts.
3. The same analysis applies to the Hammetts’ claim for violation of the
   Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act because there is no statement or
   misrepresentation alleged in Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint causing the Hammetts
   harm or allegation as to how the Hammetts were damaged by such statement or
   misrepresentation. Thus, for the reasons stated in Goodman’s brief and those stated
   herein, the Hammetts’ Complaints against Advantage for fraud should be dismissed
   pursuant to Rule 9(b) of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure, and the claim for
   violations of the Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act should be dismissed pursuant
   to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure.
4. Finally, Advantage joins Goodman in its argument that the Hammetts’
   claims are judicially estopped because they have already received the compensation they
   seek in their Complaints.
   
   WHEREFORE, Separate Defendant, Advantage Service Holdings, LLC d/b/a
   Advantage Service Company, prays the original and Amended Complaints of the
   Plaintiffs, Laura Hammett and James Hammett, be dismissed; for her attorneys’ fees and
   costs expended herein; for a trial by jury on all issues of fact arising herein; and for all
   other just and proper relief to which she may be entitled.
   Respectfully submitted,
   BARBER LAW FIRM PLLC
   425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 3400
   Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3483
   Phone: 501-372-6175; Facsimile: 888-412-3288
   A. Cale Block, ABN 07149
   D. Reece Owens, ABN 2017183
   cblock@barberlawfirm.com
   rowens@barberlawfirm.com