A Santa Clara City Council candidate’s former employer is accusing him of colluding with a vendor to fleece the company out of $250,000.
David Kertes is running for District 5, currently represented by Council Member Suds Jain. In early July, a Florida court ordered Kertes to appear via Zoom in a case involving his former employer, MicroTechnologies, a Costa Rica-based sensor and switch manufacturer.
According to Kertes’ LinkedIn profile, he worked remotely for the company for three years, from 2020 until early 2023.
In October 2022, Kertes, as vice president of sales, signed a contract to secure a pressure transducer — a device used to electrically and mechanically gauge pressure with high accuracy — from vendor Thomas Nguyen.
But MicroTechnologies claims that contract was a ruse to defraud the company out of the money paid to Nguyen. Both MicroTechnologies and its lawyer, Glen Lindsay, did not respond to a request for an interview.
In documents filed with Florida’s Broward County Circuit Court, the company claims the equipment Nguyen provided is “of little to no value” and that its “fair market value” is not “anywhere close to $250,000.” Further, MicroTechnologies categorizes itself as “unwitting,” alleging that Nguyen and Kertes were chummy and conspired to bamboozle the company out of money.
“Mr. Kertes and [Nguyen] worked together to help [Nguyen] unload the subject equipment at a value substantially more than its actual worth,” according to court documents filed by MicroTechnologies.
MicroTechnologies counter-sued to recapture $75,000 already paid to Nguyen.
In a response to the company’s claim of collusion, Nguyen’s lawyer wrote that MicroTechnologies “fails to allege sufficient ultimate facts” to substantiate a conspiratorial relationship between Nguyen and Kertes.
Kertes appears on both witness lists, posted Aug. 2. On Aug. 15, the court posted a notice that the parties sat down with a mediator on Aug. 5, indicating they may settle to avoid a trial, which is slated to start Dec. 9.
On his ballot statement, Kertes noted that he signed former Santa Clara ethics consultant Tom Shanks’ ethics pledge. Part of that pledge includes vowing to “tell the truth about myself … without overstating, understating, leaving out relevant context, and making up facts.”
An attempt to secure an interview with Kertes — to clarify whether he disclosed to the city his involvement in the lawsuit or whether he believes that failing to do so would constitute “leaving out relevant context” — failed.
Instead, in an email exchange, Kertes wrote there was “nothing to comment on,” attaching a letter from Nguyen’s lawyer, J. Marshall Fry. The letter, addressed “to whom it may concern,” clarifies that Fry subpoenaed Kertes to testify and that his client is not suing Kertes.
“I was asked questions and answered for the two attorneys,” he wrote in an email exchange. “The case does not involve me, so I have no idea what happened on the case. I have not had any further interaction with either attorney on the case.”
That letter is dated July 15, the same day Kertes pulled nomination papers.
