View this case and other resources at:
Brief Fact Summary. The Plaintiff sued the Defendant to recover money allegedly owed to him under a labor contract.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. Where a party to a contract cannot derive a benefit from the other party’s part performance of the contract, the other party cannot recover in quantum meruit for services rendered. However, where the other party has conferred a benefit upon the party, even though he does not complete performance, he may still recover in quantum meruit.
In this state it is settled that when a party is sued upon a contract which has been broken, if he elects to have his damages considered in the action against him, he must be understood as conceding that they are not to be extended beyond the amount of what he has received, and he cannot afterwards sustain an action for further damages.
View Full Point of LawIssue. Can the Plaintiff recover a reasonable sum for the service he has actually performed on a contract that he did not fully perform?
Held. Yes. Where a party to a contract cannot derive a benefit from the other party’s part performance of the contract, the other party cannot recover in quantum meruit for services rendered. However, where the other party has conferred a benefit upon the party even though he does not complete performance, he may still recover in quantum meruit. Here, the Defendant did not offer evidence to show that he was damaged by incomplete performance. Therefore, the Plaintiff was entitled to recover for the reasonable value of his services rendered.
Discussion. A person who does not complete performance on a contract may still receive money for services rendered before the breach.