A recent ruling by the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit Court of Fairfax County, Virginia, has advanced the legal conflict between Scott Pierce and Jose Israel Quintal XIX, co-founders of digital signage and processing software company AdCentral. The court dismissed all of Quintal’s objections, allowing Pierce’s fraud and embezzlement claims to proceed to trial. The global secondary mobile market knows AdCentral for its diagnostic software, where the company competes with BlackBelt, Phonecheck, Blancco and Piceasoft amongst many others.
Background of the AdCentral dispute
Pierce and Quintal founded AdCentral in 2020 as equal 50-50 partners. Pierce acted as Chief Technology Officer (CTO), and Quintal served as Chief Executive Officer (CEO). Although no formal Operating Agreement was signed, Pierce cites various documents, including a 2021 proposed Operating Agreement, a K-1 tax form, and vendor questionnaires to support the equal ownership claim.
Breakdown of partnership and control shift
By late 2023, the partnership deteriorated. Quintal took control of AdCentral, fired Pierce, and excluded him from operations. According to tax documents, Quintal diluted Pierce’s membership interest to 5.31% in 2022 and 4.9% in 2023.
Key allegations in fraud and embezzlement claims
Pierce alleges Quintal, through his ties to IQ Consulting Group—where Quintal is reportedly a significant shareholder and director—intentionally harmed AdCentral. Pierce claims IQ Consulting billed AdCentral for 100% of employee salaries despite those employees working for other IQ clients, resulting in over € 300,000 in inflated invoices. Additionally, AdCentral allegedly provided free services to IQ Consulting. Pierce further accuses Quintal of conspiring with Julian Raul Trejo Avila, AdCentral’s main IQ Consulting contact and Quintal’s longtime associate, to defraud AdCentral through false invoices and theft of services.
Court’s legal findings and implications
The court rejected Quintal’s demurrers, siding entirely with Pierce’s arguments. Notable rulings include recognizing indirect evidence sufficient to support embezzlement claims, broad interpretation of unjust enrichment beyond direct recipients, acceptance of claims for money unlawfully held by Quintal, and dismissal of Quintal’s intracorporate immunity defense in conspiracy allegations. The court found credible evidence that Quintal and Avila conspired illegally and breached fiduciary duties.
Next steps in ongoing litigation
With all objections overruled, the case will now proceed to trial. Pierce’s multiple claims, including punitive damages, constructive trust, and conspiracy, will be examined in detail as the legal dispute continues.
Market
Trade-in
Repair
Refurbishing
