Also known as: implied in law obligation · implied-in-law obligations · quasi-contract · constructive obligation
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An obligation imposed by operation of law that supplies the basis for recovery in a retained heartbalm action such as breach of promise to marry. The obligation permits damages for expenditures, reputational harm, mental anguish, and injury to health even though no express contract exists.
Alex promises to marry Jordan and Jordan incurs expenses preparing for the wedding. Alex later refuses to marry. Jordan sues. The court treats the implied-in-law obligation as the basis for a quasi-contract claim, allowing recovery of actual damages despite the absence of an enforceable express contract.
Taylor promises marriage to Morgan, then abruptly marries someone else. Morgan proves the conduct was malicious. The court recognizes an implied-in-law obligation supporting both compensatory and punitive damages under the retained heartbalm action.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The supplied authority does not address at-will employment. It addresses heartbalm actions that have been abolished by statute in most states.
Supporting sources
The obligation arises by operation of law in a retained heartbalm action rather than from the parties' explicit agreement, permitting recovery of actual damages and certain noneconomic losses.
Supporting sources
The supplied authority does not discuss employment status or law-firm obligations. It notes that punitive damages may be awarded when the defendant acted maliciously in a retained heartbalm action.
Supporting sources
…for reporting another associate's misconduct had a valid claim for breach of contract against his law firm based on an implied-in-law obligation to comply with the rules of the profession. 80 N.Y.2d 628, 593 N.Y.S.2d 752, 757, 609 N.E.2d 105, 110 (1992). The court recognized that "[i]ntrinsic to [the hiring of an attorney to…