Cummins Law Office, P.A. v. Norman Graphic Printing Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134036

Cummins is a Minnesota law firm; Norman is a Hong Kong company that hired Cummins to collect a debt from Gartner Studios.
Fee Agreement: fixed fee of $80,000 plus a 5% contingency on amounts Norman recovered from Gartner.
Cummins represented Norman in Minnesota Washington County action against Gartner and in mediation and settlement negotiations.
Settlement: Gartner agreed to pay Norman $2,452,000, with initial $252,000 and $50,000 monthly installments until $2.2 million remained.
Cummins claims Norman paid the $80,000 fixed fee but has not paid any contingency fees tied to Gartner’s settlement payments.
Cummins brought claims in state court, Norman removed to federal court, and Norman moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Cummins plausibly pleaded breach of contract	Cummins performed and is owed contingent and fixed fees per the Fee Agreement.	Plaintiff failed to plead conditions precedent and terms/records; contingency not tied to post-judgment collection.	Claim survives; pleading of performance and contract terms suffices.
Whether unjust enrichment/quantum meruit/constructive trust claims are barred by an available statutory remedy	Alternative claims may be pleaded notwithstanding an express contract; should not be barred.	Attorney’s lien under Minn. Stat. § 481.13 provides an adequate remedy; equitable claims barred after choosing statutory remedy.	Counts II, III, and V are dismissed; statutory lien precludes equitable claims.
Whether conversion claim survives	Funds payable under Gartner settlement (5% of the proceeds) are property Cummins seeks to recover.	Money cannot be converted; funds owed are not identified as personal property.	Conversion claim survives; money can be the subject of conversion in Minnesota.

Southtown Plumbing, Inc. v. Har-Ned Lumber Co., 493 N.W.2d 137 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992) (equitable relief unavailable where statutory remedy exists and was not pursued)
ServiceMaster of St. Cloud v. GAB Bus. Servs., Inc., 544 N.W.2d 302 (Minn. 1996) (unjust-enrichment barred where statutory remedy exists)
Mon-Ray, Inc. v. Granite Re, Inc., 677 N.W.2d 434 (Minn. Ct. App. 2004) (equitable relief not available where adequate legal remedy exists)
Williams v. Dow Chemical Co., 415 N.W.2d 20 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987) (availability of statutory or legal remedies affects equitable claims)
O'Neal v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 630 F.3d 1075 (8th Cir. 2011) (pleading standard and evidence requirements; pleading sufficiency at early stage)
Brown v. Medtronic, Inc., 628 F.3d 451 (8th Cir. 2010) (pleading standards and liberal construction of complaints)