Reilly

Reilly v. Inquest Technology, Inc.

Good Law
160 Cal. Rptr. 3d 236·2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 609·218 Cal. App. 4th 536·2013 WL 3942597
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 31, 2013G046291California8,645 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Leary, J.

The Independent Wholesale Sales Representatives Contractual Relations Act of 1990 (the Act) was created to protect sales representatives who receive commissions from, but are not employed by, a manufacturer. (Civ. Code, § 1738.10 et seq.) The Act requires manufacturers to enter into written contracts with their sales representatives to provide “security and clarify the contractual relations” between the parties. (§ 1738.10.) In this case, Peter Reilly agreed to use his experience and connections in the high-tech electronic industry to help “grow” Inquest Technology, Inc. (Inquest), owned by David Singhal and Pradeep Sethia (referred collectively and in the singular as Inquest, unless the context indicates otherwise). Reilly prepared a written document outlining his business relationship with Inquest, which included his understanding he would receive 50 percent of the net profits from all sales resulting from his efforts and contacts. The parties did not execute this document as a written contract, but the jury ultimately determined Inquest accepted the terms due to Inquest’s owners’ conduct.

The jury entered a general verdict in favor of Reilly, awarding him $2,065,702…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.