Brief - Commerce Partnership 8098 LP v. Equity Contracting Co PDF

Preview

Summary

Brief; prof. welle ...

Description

Restitution

Madden Commerce Partnership 8098 LP v. Equity Contracting Co.., 695 So. 2d 383 (1997) Florida District Court of Appeal, En Banc

1

Plaintiff: Commerce Partnership, owner of the building, hired general contractor World Properties Defendant: Equity, subcontractor for the general contractor for the building owned by Commerce Cause of Action: Quantum Merit Relief Sought: $17,100 Basis for Dispute: Equity’s Facts: - Commerce was the owner of the office building and Commerce contracted with a general contractor, World Properties, to perform improvements on its property. - Equity was the stucco and surfacing subcontractor for the job, having contracted with the general contractor to perform the work. - Because it inspected the job on a weekly basis, Commerce was aware of Equity’s work. - Equity completely performed its subcontract and the reasonable value of its work was $17,100. - Commerce failed to pay the general contractor the full amounts due for the job. - The general contractor did not pay Equity. - Presented direct case in under 30 minutes. - President testified that they expected payment from the general contractor and not from Commerce. - Commerce gave Equity a punch list of remedial work but when Equity’s President asked for at least partial payment from Commerce, Commerce’s rep said he couldn’t do it. - Because they didn’t receive payment, Equity did not complete the punch list. - Equity brought suit against the general contractor who later went bankrupt. - Equity adduced no evidence regarding Commerce’s payments to the general contractor or to any other party for work covered by the k. Equity’s Argument: - Commerce was unjustly enriched because it had accepted Equity’s services without paying any entity for them. - During closing argument, said they established a claim for quantum merit which meant unjust enrichment. Arguing that a quasi k claim had first been injected in the closing argument, Commerce’s attorney obtained permission to reopen the case. Commerce Argument: - They paid the general contractor in full - Quantum merit is synonymous with implied in fact. Procedural History: Commerce moved for an involuntary dismissal arguing that the evidence did not establish a k implied in fact. Trial ct denied the motion. Issue 1: What is an implied in fact k? Rule: A k implied in fact is one form of an enforceable k; it is based on a tacit promise, one that is inferred in whole or in part from the parties’ conduct, not solely from their words. Where an agreement is arrived at by words, oral or written, the k is said to be “express.” A k implied in fact is not put into promissory words with

Restitution Madden sufficient clarity, so a fact finder must examine and interpret the parties’ conduct to give definition to their unspoken agreement. Issue 2: What is an implied in law/quasi k? Rule: Not based upon the finding, by a process of implication from the facts, of an agreement between the parties. A k implied in law is a legal fiction, an obligation created by the law w/o regard to the parties’ expression of assent by their words or conduct. The fiction was adopted to provide a remedy where one party was unjustly enriched, where that party received a benefit under circumstance that made it unjust to retain it without giving compensation. Conclusion: Court’s Holding(s):

2...