The plaintiff wanted to open a Victoria's Secret franchise in Puerto Rico. Defendant Domingo, a business broker, told the plaintiff that the franchise was a "done deal" if the plaintiff hired the defendant's firm and also hired former United States Senator Birch Bayh's firm to assist. In reliance on the defendant's representations, the plaintiff entered into retainer agreements with the two firms, paying them $225,000 and $400,000, respectively. Several months later, someone from Bayh's firm emailed the plaintiff that he could not get the franchise because Victoria's Secret did not use a franchise system and instead owned and operated its own stores. The plaintiff sued Domingo, Bayh, and their firms. Bayh and his law firm settled for an undisclosed amount, and a jury awarded damages of $625,000 against Domingo and his firm. On appeal, the judgment was affirmed. What do you believe was the legal basis for the lawsuit? Why do you agree or disagree with the outcome of this case? [Portugues-Santana v. Rekomdiv International, Inc., 725 F.3d 17, 2013 U.S. App. Lexis 15331 (2013).]