Miken Technologies, Inc. v. Traffic Law Headquarters, P.C.
2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 690
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- TLH contracted with Miken on July 26, 2012 for a client-management application; agreed total price initially ~$12,800–$14,100 and Miken estimated up to 141 hours; TLH paid $7,500 upfront for database design.
- Miken estimated the design phase would take 10–12 hours but billed 73 hours and took 10 months for design; after ~18 months Miken had billed 157 hours and about $15,700 total.
- TLH terminated the contract on January 17, 2014, citing lack of timeline, phase/task dates, periodic updates, failure to produce/test/deploy a working database, and unreasonable delay.
- Miken claimed the job was 90% complete (offering source code for $7,500) and sued for $7,500 in damages; TLH counterclaimed for return of the $7,500 upfront payment.
- The trial court found Miken materially breached the contract, concluded TLH received nothing of value, and awarded TLH $7,500; the court denied Miken’s breach claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Miken) | Defendant's Argument (TLH) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Miken breached the contract by excessive delay/nonperformance | Miken: ~90% of work complete; delay reasonable in part because TLH delayed feedback; no firm deadline in contract | TLH: Delay (1.5 years) and failure to deliver a functioning product was a substantial/material breach | Court: Miken materially breached; TLH entitled to return of $7,500 prepaid |
| Whether Miken may recover on quantum meruit for work performed | Miken: Should be compensated for 157 hours/90% work under unjust enrichment/quantum meruit | TLH: Recovery not pleaded; TLH seeks refund because it received no usable product | Court: Quantum meruit claim not pleaded at trial; court will not consider unpleaded claim on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc 1976) (standard of review for court-tried cases)
- Hastings & Chivetta Architects v. Burch, 794 S.W.2d 294 (Mo.App.E.D.1990) (law implies a reasonable time to perform when no time fixed)
- McCandlish v. Estate of Timberlake, 497 S.W.2d 191 (Mo.App.1973) (amount due when party has fully performed and nothing remains)
- Fire Sprinklers, Inc. v. Icon Contracting, Inc., 279 S.W.3d 230 (Mo.App.E.D.2009) (non-breaching party may terminate for material breach and sue for total breach)
- County Asphalt Paving Co., Inc. v. Mosley Const., Inc., 239 S.W.3d 704 (Mo.App.E.D.2007) (quantum meruit prevents unjust enrichment; recovery limited to reasonable value)
- Browning-Ferris Indus. of St. Louis, Inc. v. Landmark Sys., Inc., 822 S.W.2d 569 (Mo.App.E.D.1992) (cannot recover on unpleaded cause of action)