UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

BARRIE ARNOLD,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO.:

BELFOR USA GROUP, INC, 

Defendants.

/

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

COMES NOW Plaintiff, BARRIE ARNOLD, by and through the 

undersigned attorneys of record, and files this Complaint and Demand for Jury 

Trial against Defendant, BELFOR USA GROUP, INC., and alleges:

Jurisdiction and Venue

1. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§1332 (diversity jurisdiction) as it is between citizens of different states and the 

amount in controversy is greater than $75,000 exclusive of interest, costs and 

attorneys’ fees. 

2. At all relevant times, Plaintiff, BARRIE ARNOLD (herein after “Mr. 

Arnold”), was a citizen of the State of Florida and was employed by Defendant in 

the State of Florida.

Case 5:20-cv-00146-AW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/19/20 Page 1 of 9
2

3. Defendant, BELFOR USA GROUP, INC. (herein after “BELFOR” or 

“Defendant”), is a corporation incorporated under the laws of Colorado with its 

principal place of business in Michigan.

4. Venue is proper in this Court because performance of the contract at 

issue occurred in Bay County, Florida.

Factual Allegations

5. Plaintiff began working for Defendant, a disaster recovery and 

property restoration service, on or around April 18, 2018 as a Sales Manager at 

company’s Pensacola, Florida office.

6. Prior to accepting this employment, Plaintiff met with Chris Self, a 

branch manager for the company. Mr. Self, as the hiring agent for Defendant, 

agreed to a pay structure with Plaintiff consisting salary, benefits, and commission 

with a commission rate of 1% on all restoration contracts commissioned up to 

$1,500,000 and 2% on all restoration contracts secured above this amount. Plaintiff 

was also to receive a draw on future commissions of $15,000 per year in a bimonthly amount in his paycheck.

7. At this time, Mr. Self assured Plaintiff that Defendant always paid 

their commissions and that Mr. Self was unaware of any issues related to the 

payment of commissions between Defendant and its Sales Managers. The terms 

and conditions of Plaintiff’s commission structure were only discussed verbally 

Case 5:20-cv-00146-AW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/19/20 Page 2 of 9
3

between the parties and neither party ever signed a written document or reduced 

these terms and conditions to writing.

8. It was further discussed between the parties that the employment was 

at-will, not for a definite period of time, and did not require any additional services 

be provided by Plaintiff beyond the securement of restoration contracts.

9. Plaintiff was sent to Panama City, Florida to secure restoration 

contracts on behalf of Defendant after Hurricane Michael devastated large portions 

of state’s panhandle in October 2018. 

10. Plaintiff secured approximately $12,000,000 worth of restoration 

contracts, consisting of approximately 10-12 individual contracts from businesses,

from the time he arrived in Panama City, Florida to January 25, 2019. Under the 

terms of the contract entered into between the parties, this entitled Plaintiff to 

approximately $225,000 in commissions for securing these restoration contracts as 

the Sales Person and/or Lead Generator listed on the individual contracts. 

11. On January 25, 2019, Defendant contacted Plaintiff and informed him 

that the company was terminating his employment effective immediately. As of the 

date of his termination, Defendant had only paid commissions of $10,000 to 

Plaintiff, which came in the form of draws on future commissions.

12. Despite Plaintiff’s performance of securing restoration contracts and 

generating approximately $12,000,000 in revenue for Defendant, the company 

Case 5:20-cv-00146-AW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/19/20 Page 3 of 9
4

informed Plaintiff that they would not be paying him any additional compensation 

for the work he performed for the benefit of the company. As such, Defendant 

elected to withhold approximately $215,000 in commissions from Plaintiff for the 

previously secured restoration contracts.

Count I – Breach of Contract

13. Plaintiff realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-12 and incorporates 

them herein by reference.

14. Plaintiff entered into an Oral Employment Contract with the 

Defendant whereby Plaintiff would secure restoration contracts with businesses in 

return for commission payments.

15. Prior to his termination, Plaintiff received $10,000 in draws on future 

commissions as per the Oral Employment Contract between Plaintiff and the 

Defendant.

16. Between October 2018 and January 25, 2019, Plaintiff secured 

approximately $12,000,000 worth of restoration contracts with various businesses 

and was properly listed as the Sales Person and/or Lead Generator for Defendant 

responsible for securing the contract.

17. As per the Oral Employment Contract and the Defendant's records, 

Plaintiff is owed commission of approximately $215,000 for securing restoration 

Case 5:20-cv-00146-AW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/19/20 Page 4 of 9
5

contracts on behalf of Defendant as the Sales Person and/or Lead Generator listed 

on the individual contracts.

18. The Defendant has breached the Oral Employment Contract by failing 

or refusing to pay commission pursuant to the contract.

19. Plaintiff incurred, or will incur, additional compensatory and 

incidental expenses as a result of the Defendant's breach of contract.

20. Plaintiff has been damaged as a result of Defendant's breach of the 

contract.

Count II – Unpaid Wages Pursuant to §448.08, Florida Statute

21. Plaintiff realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-12 and incorporates 

them herein by reference.

22. The terms of the Oral Employment Contract between Plaintiff and 

Defendant that is the subject matter of this litigation included payment of wages to 

Plaintiff by the Defendant, in the form of commissions.

23. The negotiated, agreed upon commissions in the Oral Employment 

Contract between Plaintiff and Defendant was 1% on all restoration contracts 

commissioned up to $1,500,000 and 2% on all restoration contracts secured above 

this amount. Plaintiff was also to receive a draw on future commissions of $15,000 

per year in a bi-monthly amount in his paycheck.

Case 5:20-cv-00146-AW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/19/20 Page 5 of 9
6

24. The Defendant paid Plaintiff bi-monthly from the date of his hire up 

until his termination, in an amount totaling $10,000. 

25. Plaintiff performed his duties as agreed upon in the Oral Employment 

Contract between the Parties.

26. The Defendant breached the Oral Employment Contract by failing to 

pay Plaintiff his wages for the restoration contracts he secured for the benefit of 

Defendant from April 2018 to January 2019.

27. As a result of the breach of contract by Defendant, Plaintiff has been 

damaged in the amount of approximately $215,000 in unpaid wages.

28. Plaintiff has been forced to retain the services of legal counsel to 

obtain his commissions and has agreed to pay his counsel a reasonable fee for their

services.

29. Pursuant to §448.08, Florida Statute, successful litigants in unpaid 

wage claims are entitled to recover their costs and attorneys' fees.

Count III – Quantum Meruit

30. Plaintiff realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-12 and incorporates 

them herein by reference.

31. Plaintiff conferred a benefit on the Defendant by securing

approximately $12,000,000 worth of restoration contracts with various businesses.

Case 5:20-cv-00146-AW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/19/20 Page 6 of 9
7

32. The Defendant appreciated this benefit in the form of approximately 

$12,000,000 in revenue but has failed to provide the reasonable value of Plaintiff's 

services in securing the restoration contracts resulting in approximately 

$12,000,000 in revenue for Defendant.

33. It is inequitable for the Defendant to retain the benefit of 

approximately $12,000,000 in revenue without providing a reasonable benefit to 

Plaintiff for securing restoration contracts for Defendant.

Count IV – Unjust Enrichment

34. Plaintiff realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1-12 and incorporates 

them herein by reference.

35. The Defendant and Plaintiff entered into an Oral Employment 

Contract that was implied in fact because Plaintiff performed services which the 

Defendant clearly understood and intended compensation to be paid.

36. Plaintiff performed services according to the Oral Employment 

Contract in good faith.

37. The Defendant received services provided by Plaintiff and acquiesced 

to these services including receiving approximately $12,000,000 in revenue 

pursuant to the restoration contracts secured by Plaintiff.

38. The facts, evidence, conduct of the parties and past performance 

clearly indicate that the Defendant was aware that Plaintiff expected to be 

Case 5:20-cv-00146-AW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/19/20 Page 7 of 9
8

compensated for services provided on behalf of the Defendant, including securing 

restoration contracts resulting in approximately $12,000,000 in revenue for 

Defendant.

39. The facts and evidence support that the value of Plaintiff's services 

was reasonable and that the Defendant was unjustly enriched by its actions and/or 

omissions.

40. In reliance on the Oral Employment Contract, Plaintiff has not been 

compensated and the Defendant has been unjustly enriched by retaining the benefit 

provided by Plaintiff without providing Plaintiff compensation for securing 

restoration contracts on behalf of the company.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues herein that are 

so triable and demands judgment against Defendant for the following:

(a) that process be issued, and this Court take jurisdiction over this case;

(b) that this Court grant equitable relief against Defendant under the

applicable counts set forth above, and any other equitable relief

available to Plaintiff;

(c) enter judgment against Defendant and for Plaintiff awarding all

Case 5:20-cv-00146-AW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/19/20 Page 8 of 9
9

legally-available general, compensatory damages, punitive damages and 

economic loss to Plaintiff from Defendant’s violations of law and conduct

enumerated herein;

(d) enter judgment against Defendant and award Plaintiff attorney’s fees and 

costs;

(e) award Plaintiff interest where appropriate; and

(f) grant such other further relief as being just and proper under the

circumstances.

Respectfully submitted this 19th day of May 2020.

/s/ Matthew D. MacNamara

Matthew D. MacNamara (FL Bar No. 113002)

matt@scottandwallacelaw.com

Robert M. Scott (FL Bar No. 57149)

rscott@scottandwallacelaw.com

J. Clint Wallace (FL Bar No. 59590)

cwallace@scottandwallacelaw.com

SCOTT & WALLACE LLP

209 E. Brevard St.

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Telephone: (850) 222-7777

Facsimile: (850) 222-7778

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case 5:20-cv-00146-AW-MJF Document 1 Filed 05/19/20 Page 9 of 9