This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Contracts
Breach of Contract
Failure to Pay Commissions

Mark Comin v. International Business Machines Corporation (IBM)

Published: Mar. 1, 2024 | Result Date: Oct. 6, 2022 |

Case number: 3:19-cv-07261-JD Settlement –  $4,800,000

Judge

James Donato

Court

USDC Northern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Kent A. Bronson
(Milberg, Coleman, Bryson, Phillips & Grossman PLLC)

Matthew E. Lee
(Milberg, Coleman, Bryson, Phillips & Grossman PLLC)

Jeremy R. Williams
(Milberg, Coleman, Bryson, Phillips & Grossman PLLC)


Defendant

Aaron L. Agenbroad
(Jones Day)

Cindi L. Ritchey
(Jones Day)

Justin R. Barnes
(Jackson Lewis PC)

Kelli N. Church
(Jackson Lewis PC)


Facts

Mark Comin sued his former employer, International Business Machines Corporation (IBM), on behalf of a putative class.

Comin worked for IBM as a sales representative in California for over 17 years before leaving in 2018. IBM paid Comin and other sales reps with a combination of a fixed salary and commissions.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff asserted claims under California Labor Code Section 2751, the Unfair Competition Law, and for breach of contract. Plaintiff contended that defendant had a practice of not providing sales representatives with a written contract about commissions, which Section 251 requires, and failing to pay commissions as they came due. Plaintiff further claimed that defendant had engaged in a "bait and switch" scheme in which it incentivized sales reps with the promise of potentially large commissions under an incentive plan letter (IPL), which outlined sales targets and the rate at which the representative would earn commissions, only to renege and deny that the IPL was an enforceable contract when pay day arrived.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied all contentions.

Result

The case settled for $4.75 million.

Other Information

Related Case: 3:21-cv-06645-JD; Briggs v. International Business Machines Corporation


#140282

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390