More In This Category
We represented ADT Security Systems in the Advantage Consulting Group lawsuit where Advantage signed a recruiting contract where they would recruit many employees for ADT. And ADT was not getting the results that were anticipated or expected and terminated the contract. And Advantage brought a lawsuit saying ADT owed them more money. The contract had provisions for paying so many dollars per hire like $750.00 per hire, but also had monthly payments being made over a period of about six months. And on the per hire ADT had over paid and on the monthly payments they had simply stopped making them. And so what happened is the contract was probably ambiguous and Advantage Consulting had prepared it and written it.
And so the federal district court here in Minnesota looked at that on a summary judgment motion and to our surprise and disappointment ruled against us and said that we owed Advantage more money despite the fact that we had had very few hires. And so we appealed that to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and a three-judge panel there unanimously reversed and ADT was victorious and as a matter of fact, ended up that Advantage Consulting owed them some money on a refund at the end of the case instead of ADT owing Advantage anything.
Contact Keith Broady
Email This Lawyer
See All This Lawyer's Videos
Visit Lawyer's Website
Minneapolis commercial litigation and professional liability defense attorney Keith Broady reflects on Advantage Consulting Group v. ADT Sec. Systems, 306 F.3d 582.