Quantum meruit is a legal theory that allows a party to recover compensation if they provided services to another with the expectation of payment, but without an explicit agreement as to an amount.[1] Quantum meruit claims are frequently alleged in construction cases, with a contractor claiming they provided construction services to a project owner, who would be unjustly enriched if not required to pay for them.
In Seabold Construction Co., Inc. v. KOZ 2211 SW 4th Ave., LLC,[2] the Oregon Court of Appeals reaffirmed the principle that a quantum meruit claim cannot be used to save a contractor just because the parties' written contract does not provide all desired relief. In Seabold, the contractor claimed that the owner caused delays in the project, which caused the contractor to "incur additional costs, expenses, and lost profits," for which it should be compensated.[3] But the contractor had a problem: the parties' written contract included an express provision setting out the parties' rights and responsibilities with respect to project delays, and it was undisputed that the contractor was not entitled to relief based on that provision. The Court of Appeals concluded that the trial court had properly dismissed the quantum meruit claim, reaffirming that if a valid, enforceable contract governs the work at issue, the contract controls and no quantum meruit claim exists.[4]
This decision serves as a reminder of the importance of contractors and owners understanding their contractual obligations from the start of a project. If a contract has a delay provision, for example, that provision will likely govern any later dispute pertaining to contract delays. An aggrieved contractor that does not believe the delay provision fully compensates them for their delay-related losses likely won't be saved by a quantum meruit claim.
[1] In re Klemp, 363 Or 62, 75, 418 P3d 733 (2018).
[2] 344 Or App 688 (2025).
[View source.]
