- Facts: Architect fraud. Architect played intermediary role b/t owner (D) and contractor (P) for K to build Turkish bathhouse. Architect had P sign contract saying price would be $23k, had contractor sign one saying $33,721. Bathhouse would increase property value by $22k. D wants to get paid, saying P unjustly enriched by his work.
- Issue: What does P owe D?
- Holding: There is no K b/c there was no meeting of the minds (rescission), and thus D can recover labor and materials used on project.
- Rule: Quantum Meruit: “as much as he deserved.” The reasonable value of services; damages awarded in an amount considered reasonable to compensate a person who has rendered services in a quasi-contractual relationship.
Friday, March 23, 2012
Vickery v. Ritchie case brief
Vickery v. Ritchie; (SJC of MA, 1909); CB 632; Notes 18
Earning a Juris Doctor (JD) degree is a significant accomplishment, opening a wide array of career paths beyond the traditional legal practi...
Class 1: Elements of Fundamental Value: Present Value, Future Value, Net Present Value: Elements of Fundamental Value (38) One year : ...
I can help you land in the top 10% of your law school class. Imagine, how your life would be different if you were in the top 10% o...
Corthell v. Summit Thread Company (1933) · Facts: Corthell is a salesman for Summit. He invents contraption that is bought b...