Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 407.911 (2026)

Definitions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  407.911.  Definitions. — As used in sections 407.911 to 407.915, the following terms mean:

  (1)  "Commission", compensation accruing to a sales representative for payment by a principal, the rate of which is expressed as a percentage of the dollar amount of orders or sales, or as a specified amount per order or per sale;

  (2)  "Principal", a person, firm, corporation, partnership or other business entity, whether or not it has a permanent or fixed place of business in this state, and who:

  (a)  Manufactures, produces, imports, provides, or distributes a product or service for sale;

  (b)  Contracts with a sales representative to solicit orders for the product or service; and

  (c)  Compensates the sales representative, in whole or in part, by commission;

  (3)  "Sales representative", a person, firm, corporation, partnership, or other business entity who contracts with a principal to solicit orders and who is compensated, in whole or in part, by commission, but shall not include a person, firm, corporation, partnership, or other business entity who places orders or purchases for its own account for resale.

­­--------

(L. 1989 S.B. 192 § 1 subsec. 1, A.L. 2005 S.B. 211)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1994–2025 · leading case: Lapponese v. Carts of Colorado, Inc., 422 S.W.3d 396 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013).
Lapponese v. Carts of Colorado, Inc., 422 S.W.3d 396 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 18× “Sections 407.911 et seq. of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act allows for the recovery of statutory damages and attorneys’ fees should sales commissions not be paid following the termination of the relationship between a sales representative and principal.”
Schwab v. Nat'l Dealers Warranty, Inc., 298 S.W.3d 87 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 21× “BACKGROUND The sole issue in this case is whether Employees’ compensation constituted a “commission” as defined in Section 407.911 RSMo Cum.Supp.2005. 1 Employer is in the, business of selling extended automobile warranties over the telephone and Employees are its former…”
J.S. DeWeese Co. v. Hughes-Treitler Mfg. Corp., 881 S.W.2d 638 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 4× “913 is not available to corporations, pursuant to § 407.911. Respondent contends that this court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal from the dismissal because the notice of appeal did not refer to the order dismissing Count III.”
Hoffman v. Van Pak Corp., 16 S.W.3d 684 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 5× “For this statute to apply to the parties of this case, plaintiff had to show that defendant was a “principal,” that plaintiff was a “sales representative,” and that plaintiff was compensated by “commission” as those terms are defined in Section 407.911: 407.911. Definitions — As…”
Indus. to Indus., Inc. v. Hillsman Modular Molding, Inc., 2002 WI 51 (Wis. 2002). “(citing Mo. Rev. Stat. § 407.911 (1986) (emphasis added)).”
Trim Fit, LLC v. Dickey, 607 F.3d 528 (8th Cir. 2010). “See Mo. Rev. Stat § 407.911(2)(a), (3) (2000), amended by 2005 Mo.”
Kraft v. Edwards, 946 S.W.2d 775 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997). “His petition alleged that the commissions were due under Sections 407.911^07.913, RSMo.1994, governing “sales representatives.”
Nash v. DAS Acquisition Co., LLC (E.D. Mo. 2025). · cites it 8× “” Mo. Rev. Stat. § 407.911 (1). Further, the principal must “provide[] .”
Mike Abduhamed, Appellant/Cross-Respondent v. Carol House Furniture, Inc., Respondent/Cross-Appellant. (Mo. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 4× “915 renders void any contractual provision purporting to waive any provision of §§ 407.911 to 407.915. In his sole point on appeal, Abuhamdeh argues the trial court erred in not imposing the mandatory statutory penalty under § 407.”
Smith v. Ideal Image Dev. Corp. (E.D. Mo. 2020). · cites it 3× “Missouri sales commission statute—Mo. Rev. Stat. § 407.911, et seq. The Missouri sales commission statute imposes liability on “[a]ny principal who fails to timely pay the sales representative commissions earned by such sales representative .”
Poorman v. TTG, Inc. (W.D. Mo. 2022). · cites it 3× “The MCSA, Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 407.911 , et seq., “governs the obligation for and payment of sales commissions in the State of Missouri, ‘focus[ing] on the timely payment of sales commissions earned by a sales representative under contract with a principal.”
Gardner v. 4 U Tech., Inc., 88 F. Supp. 2d 1005 (E.D. Mo. 2000). · cites it 2× “140 (1994) (Count IV), and violation of Mo.Rev.Stat. §§ 407.911, et. seq. (1994), regarding payment of sales commissions (Count V).”
— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 407.911(2)(a) — 1 case
Trim Fit, LLC v. Dickey, 607 F.3d 528 (8th Cir. 2010). “See Mo. Rev. Stat § 407.911(2)(a), (3) (2000), amended by 2005 Mo.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.