United States Sixth Circuit

In a contract dispute between a pet supply manufacturer and its Midwestern sales representative, summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff-sales representative is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded where: 1) the district court correctly held that a valid notice required some reference to a breach with an opportunity for the plaintiff to cure, and here, because defendant failed to provide the required "good faith written notice" of breach or default, the termination of plaintiff was without cause; 2) the district court correctly held that plaintiff did not substantially breach the Agreement prior to termination; 3) district court's holding defendant liable to plaintiff for commissions on sales to "big-box" stores is reversed as the Agreement is ambiguous on this point; and 4) district court's holding that the Michigan Sales Representative Commission Act (SRCA) applied to the "without cause" payment authorized in section 7.2 of the Agreement was in error.

Appellate Information

• Argued 01/12/2010
• Decided 05/07/2010
• Published 05/07/2010

Judges

• Before MARTIN and WHITE, Circuit Judges; ZOUHARY, District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:Stephen S. Muhich, Dykema Gossett PLLC, Grand Rapids, Michigan, for Appellant. Loyst Fletcher, Jr., Law Office, Flint, Michigan, for Appellees. ON BRIEF:Stephen S. Muhich, Dykema Gossett PLLC, Grand Rapids, Michigan, for Appellant. Loyst Fletcher, Jr., Law Office, Flint, Michigan, for Appellees.