Also known as: quasi-contractual obligations · quasi contract obligation · quasi-contract obligation · quasi-contract · quasi contract
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A duty imposed by law upon a party to compensate another to prevent unjust enrichment. The obligation arises when one party confers a measurable benefit under circumstances making retention without payment inequitable. The law implies the duty regardless of the parties' actual intent or any agreement.
Quincy Quan and Quintin Quest became engaged after months of planning. Quincy spent over twenty thousand dollars on wedding deposits, a custom dress, and relocation costs in preparation for the ceremony. Quintin called off the wedding two weeks before the date. Quincy sued Quintin seeking reimbursement for those expenditures under a quasi-contractual obligation.
Quade Quimby and Queenie Quinones lived together for six years without marrying. Quade managed the household and supported Queenie's business ventures with unpaid labor and personal funds. After separation Queenie retained all accumulated assets. Quade sued Queenie to recover the value of the services and contributions to prevent unjust enrichment.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Quillan Quick and Quiana Quach cohabited for eight years and pooled resources to purchase property titled solely in Quillan's name. Quiana provided full-time homemaking and career support that enabled Quillan's professional advancement. After separation Quillan claimed sole ownership. Quiana sued for restitution of the value of her contributions under quasi-contract principles.
Quinn Industries owner Quincy Bank and his spouse Quiana Quach agreed that Quiana would work full time while Quincy pursued an advanced degree. Quiana covered all living expenses and tuition from her salary. After graduation Quincy sought divorce and claimed the degree as separate property. Quiana sued for restitution of the value of her financial support under a quasi-contractual obligation.
A quasi-contractual obligation is imposed by law to prevent unjust enrichment even when the parties had no agreement or mutual assent. An implied-in-fact contract requires proof of the parties' actual intent through their conduct. Courts disregard the parties' intent when imposing the quasi-contractual duty.
Restitution is available when one party conferred a measurable benefit through part performance before the contract was avoided. The recipient may not retain the benefit without compensating the performing party. Recovery is measured by the reasonable value of the benefit conferred.
Yes. A signed written promise to pay an antecedent debt that would be enforceable but for the statute of limitations is binding without new consideration. The antecedent debt supplies the moral and legal basis for enforcement of the new promise.
Yes. Restitution is available to the extent the performing party conferred a measurable benefit that the recipient unjustly retained. Recovery is limited to the reasonable value of the benefit, not lost profits or expectation damages.
…in Desny v. Wilder (1956) 46 Cal.2d 715 [299 P.2d 257], in a sense all contracts made in fact, as distinguished from quasi-contractual obligations, are express contracts, differing only in the manner in which the assent of the parties is expressed and proved. (See 46 Cal.2d at pp. 735-736.) [^maj-17]: The Court of Appeal opinion in…