– Supreme Court of NJ.
– Oakwood is appealing the lower courts judgment of $475 entered towards Callano.
– Callano planted shrubbery for Pendergast, and he died before he could pay them $500.
– After Pendergast died, Oakwood sold the estate to someone else for…
– Callano sued Oakwood for unjust enrichment ($475) and won in the lower courts…retention or payment would be unjust…
– Oakwood appealed and won…the burden of paying Callano rests on the Pendergast estate.
– Is Oakwood obligated to pay plaintiffs for the reasonable value of the shrubbery on the theory of quasi-contractual liability?
– To recover on the theory of quasi-contract the plaintiffs must prove that the defendant was enriched, received a benefit, and that retention of the benefit would be unjust…
– Common threads of quasi contract.
- Plaintiff expected remuneration from the defendant at the time the benefit was conferred.
- Quasi-contracts involve some direct relationship between the parties or a mistake on the part of the person conferring the benefit.
- Defendant had no dealings with Oakwood and never expected payments from them.
- Contract was made at the time for the benefit to be conferred to Pendergast, not Oakwood…no issue with Oakwood.
- Case may be heard on the behalf of Pendergast estate.
****Cannot substitute on promisor or debtor for another****
– There is also NO contention of fraud on Oakwood’s behalf.
– Reversed in favor of Oakwood.