Archon Construction Co. Inc. v. U.S. Shelter, LLC
78 N.E.3d 1067
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- U.S. Shelter contracted Archon to install a sanitary sewer system for the Oak Ridge subdivision; the contract incorporated the city plans and specifications (Elgin and Illinois specifications) and required televising the sewer one year after completion for city acceptance.
- Archon installed the sewer (PVC SDR 26 per its bid), performed air and mandrel tests that passed, and completed initial repairs in 2005 without seeking extra payment for those repairs.
- In 2007 the city’s videotape identified defects and required excavation and replacement of a segment (MH 108–110) with ductile iron pipe; Archon performed the work and invoiced $247,432.41, which U.S. Shelter refused to pay.
- Archon initially sued on contract "extra work" theories (summary judgment for defendants was reversed on first appeal), but on remand Archon dismissed its contract claims and proceeded solely on quantum meruit; U.S. Shelter counterclaimed for repair/replacement costs.
- The trial court found the parties’ written contract governed the work and denied Archon’s quantum meruit claim; it found for Archon on U.S. Shelter’s contract counterclaim because U.S. Shelter failed to prove Archon’s breach caused the later damages. Both parties appealed.
- The appellate court affirmed: quantum meruit is barred because the express contract covered the same general subject matter (installation and acceptance of the sanitary sewer), and the trial court’s ruling on the counterclaim was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Archon can recover under quantum meruit for costs of repairs/replacement required for city acceptance | Archon: work to replace PVC with ductile iron and associated costs were not covered by the contract (proposal specified PVC), so no express contract governs this work and quasi-contract relief is available | U.S. Shelter: the contract (Plans, General Notes, Elgin/Illinois specs) required a sewer acceptable to the city and mandated televising/repairs at contractor’s expense; the disputed work falls within the contract’s subject matter | Held: Denied. Quantum meruit barred because an express contract governed the same general subject matter (installation and acceptance of the sewer); Archon’s remedy, if any, was a contractual “extras” claim. |
| Whether Archon’s voluntary dismissal of its contract claims permitted quantum meruit recovery | Archon: dismissal of contract claims leaves quantum meruit available | U.S. Shelter: existence of an express contract precludes quantum meruit regardless of procedural posture | Held: Denied. Substantive existence of an express contract (not tactical dismissal) bars quasi-contract relief. |
| Whether the contract’s “additional work” clause required Archon to seek negotiated pricing/time-and-materials and precluded quantum meruit | Archon: clause did not obligate Archon to absorb these particular costs | U.S. Shelter: clause shows the parties contemplated extra work be handled contractually | Held: The clause supports that extra-work remedies lie under the contract (not quantum meruit). |
| Whether U.S. Shelter proved breach and causation for its repair/restoration counterclaim | U.S. Shelter: Archon’s earlier improper fittings, couplings, and compaction caused the later defects and subsequent restoration costs | Archon: trial evidence did not prove the 2007 defects were caused by Archon’s 2005 work; other construction and settling occurred in the interim | Held: The trial court’s finding for Archon affirmed; U.S. Shelter failed to prove Archon’s breach caused the later damages. |
Key Cases Cited
- Reliable Fire Equipment Co. v. Arredondo, 2011 IL 111871 (standard of review after bench trial and deference to trial court)
- Avery v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 216 Ill. 2d 100 (contract interpretation de novo when contract unambiguous)
- People v. Kinion, 97 Ill. 2d 322 (quantum meruit unavailable where express contract exists)
- Industrial Lift Truck Serv. Corp. v. Mitsubishi Int’l Corp., 104 Ill. App. 3d 357 (quasi-contract unavailable when work falls within general subject matter of express contract)
- Stark Excavating, Inc. v. Carter Constr. Servs., Inc., 2012 IL App (4th) 110357 (quantum meruit allowed where the extra work was outside the contract’s general subject matter)
- Walker v. Brown, 28 Ill. 378 (historical articulation: express and implied contracts cannot coexist)