Restitution Flashcards
Restatement § 373. Restitution When Other Party is in Breach
Subject to the rule stated in Subsection (2), on a breach by non-performance that gives rise to a claim for damages for total breach or on a repudiation, the injured party is entitled to restitution for any benefit that he has conferred on the other party by way of part performance or reliance.
The injured party has no right to restitution if he has performed all of his duties under the contract and no performance by the other party remains due other than payment of a definite sum of money for that performance.
Bush v. Canfield
Majority: Restitution is appropriate when a partial advance payment is made, even in a losing contract. Restitution should be awarded independently of risk allocation (unless total amount of 0 is paid in advance).
Dissent: Breaching party should be compensated for injuries it suffers as a result of breach, which is capped at expectation. If restitution is allowed here, the purpose of contract law, assigning risks to one another, is defeated.
Britton v. Turner
Quantum Meruit provides a basis outside the contract for the employee to recover the value of the services provided.
An employee is entitled under quantum meruit to the reasonable value of the services provided
Cotnam v. Wisdom
A Quasi-Contract is a contract implied-in-law; creates a duty to pay for the reasonable value of a service rendered even when no actual contract existed.
Restitution Recap:
- Remedy for beach
Must be “total” breach
Claiming party’s performance must be partially executory - By party in breach
Not an action “on the contract”
3 (maybe 4) elements of restitution claim
K is evidence of acceptance
Can contract around (“liquidated damages”) - Quasi-Contract & Incapacitation
Non-Officious requirement relaxed
Other still significant present:
Non-gratuitous (Martin v. Little, Brown and Co.)
Measurable benefit
Effectively limits recovery to medical professionals
