Two neighbors have lovely landscaped yards.One yard is cared for solely by the homeowner,Hollis.The other neighbor pays ABC Landscaping Service for the gardening work done on the yard.Hollis notices one day that an apparently new employee of ABC is working in Hollis's yard by mistake.Hollis says nothing.When the employee asks for payment,Hollis refuses on the basis that the gardening work was a mistake and that Hollis has no contract with ABC.Which of the following is true regarding whether ABC could recover against Hollis?
A) ABC likely has no rights against Hollis.
B) ABC could recover against Hollis based on breach of contract.
C) ABC could likely recover on a theory of quantum meruit.
D) ABC could likely recover based on a negligence theory.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

ABC could likely recover on a theory of quantum meruit, which means "as much as he deserved." This theory allows a party to recover the reasonable value of services provided in the absence of an express contract. Here, even if there was no express contract between Hollis and ABC, ABC could argue that they provided gardening services to Hollis's yard and should be compensated for their work based on the reasonable value of the services provided. However, ABC would need to prove that the services rendered were necessary, beneficial to Hollis, and that Hollis accepted them.

Two Neighbors Have Lovely Landscaped Yards