In a surprising turn of events, prominent cryptocurrency influencer Ben Armstrong, known for his BitBoy Crypto platform, has launched a lawsuit against the leadership of Hit Network, the parent company of his former venture. The lawsuit, filed in Georgia, USA, accuses Hit Network CEO Timothy ‘TJ’ Shedd Jr. and his father Timothy Shedd Sr. of conspiring to wrest control of the company from its founder.

Armstrong, alongside BJ Investment Holdings (BJIH), the parent company of Hit Network, is leading the legal charge. The suit alleges that the defendants improperly seized the company by locking Armstrong out of essential accounts, misappropriating company funds for personal gain, and engaging in fraudulent activities.

At the heart of the matter is the ownership structure of BJ Investment Holdings. According to the lawsuit, Armstrong maintains a 67% stake in the company through his corporate entity, Better Than TJ LLC, while TJSJ Holdings, owned by the Shedd family, controls the remaining 33%. This ownership arrangement forms the basis of Armstrong’s claim that the Shedd duo unlawfully seized control of Hit Network.

The lawsuit contends that Armstrong’s ousting from the company was not only unjust but also involved multiple wrongful actions. It alleges that the Shedds took control of Armstrong’s email and social media accounts, indicating a calculated effort to sideline him from the company he founded.

One of the most significant claims in the lawsuit is the accusation that the defendants have been “misappropriating, diverting, converting, and wasting” the company’s funds, using these assets for personal enrichment. Considering that the company reportedly generates an impressive $1 million in ad revenue every month, the financial implications of these allegations are substantial.

The legal battle comes in the wake of Armstrong’s abrupt departure from the company in late August, which sent shockwaves through the crypto community. In a statement issued at the time, BitBoy Crypto, one of Hit Network’s flagship brands, announced that “BJ Investment Holdings, the parent company of Hit Network, took decisive legal action in removing Ben Armstrong from the company.”

The rebranding of BitBoy Crypto to Discover Crypto shortly after Armstrong’s departure raised eyebrows within the crypto community. However, the reasons behind these actions remained unclear until now.

CEO TJ Shedd claimed that Armstrong had caused “emotional, physical, and financial damage” to Hit Network and its community. In a termination letter dated August 25, it was alleged that Armstrong had physically assaulted and verbally abused employees, including Shedd himself, and was under the influence of “illegal substances and steroids.”

Notably, the lawsuit does not address these specific allegations, and Armstrong has publicly denied any involvement in physical violence or the use of hard drugs during a recorded phone call. These allegations and counter-allegations add a layer of complexity to an already contentious legal battle.

In a separate development, earlier this year, Armstrong introduced BEN, a governance token for BitBoy’s decentralized autonomous community known as Ben DAO. According to Armstrong, this token was created by a group he was part of, composed of “all the important Bens in crypto.”

As of the latest update, the price of BEN has experienced some fluctuations, trading at $0.000000021642, marking a 10% decline in the past 24 hours and a 44% decrease over the past month. These fluctuations have raised concerns among cryptocurrency enthusiasts about the token’s stability and future prospects.

Cryptonews has reached out to both Ben Armstrong and TJ Shedd for their comments on the ongoing legal dispute, but as of now, no responses have been received.

In summary, the cryptocurrency community is closely watching the legal battle between Ben Armstrong and the leadership of Hit Network, which owns BitBoy Crypto. The lawsuit, centered on allegations of a wrongful takeover and financial mismanagement, has the potential to impact the crypto industry and raise questions about corporate governance within the sector. As the case unfolds, the crypto community will be eagerly awaiting further developments and insights into the reasons behind this high-profile dispute.