60 A.3d 792
Me.2013Background
- In 2005 Dinan began working for Alpha Networks Inc. as a salesperson under an employment agreement with an incentive plan.
- In 2008 Alpha reduced Dinan’s pay under a new incentive plan, and in 2009–2010 Alpha promised a new plan but did not adopt it.
- Dinan formally resigned in March 2010 and signed a separation agreement; Alpha initially paid but later stopped payment on two checks due to an error.
- In July 2010 Dinan filed a Superior Court complaint alleging violations of 26 M.R.S. § 626, breach of contract, breach of quasi-contract, and unjust enrichment.
- July 2011 federal jury found no breach of the employment agreement but found Alpha breached the separation agreement and awarded Dinan $70,331.93 in quasi-contract damages—the reasonable value of his services.
- The federal court certified a question to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court asking whether § 626 applies to quantum meruit recovery for the value of services, i.e., the “wages” protection applies to quantum meruit if the services are the type for which wages would be due.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does § 626 apply to quantum meruit recovery for services rendered? | Dinan argues the quantum meruit recovery is wage-like and should trigger § 626. | Alpha Networks argues the recovery is not wages and § 626 does not apply. | The statute applies to wage-type services; quantum meruit activates § 626 only if services are wages. |
Key Cases Cited
- Burke v. Port Resort Realty Corp., 737 A.2d 1055 (Me. 1999) (defines ‘wages’ and the scope of § 626 applicability)
- Cummings v. Bean, 853 A.2d 221 (Me. 2004) (quantum meruit as implied contract; measure of damages)
- Jenkins, Inc. v. Walsh Bros., Inc., 776 A.2d 1229 (Me. 2001) (quantum meruit as the value of services; related to wages)
- Runnells v. Quinn, 890 A.2d 713 (Me. 2006) (three elements of a quantum meruit claim; reasonable value of services)
- Fortin v. Titcomb, A.3d --- (Me. 2013) (certified question procedure; comity in state-federal decisions)
- Darney v. Dragon Prods. Co., LLC, 994 A.2d 804 (Me. 2010) (certified question criteria; no controlling precedent)
- In re Richards, 223 A.2d 827 (Me. 1966) (limits on advisory opinions; certification authority)
- White v. Edgar, 320 A.2d 668 (Me. 1974) (policy favoring state-federal comity in certification)