734 S.E.2d 177
S.C. Ct. App.2012Background
- Williams Carpet provided flooring materials and services to Skelly's Green Haven project starting 2005; no written contract existed, only oral handshake agreements.
- Skelly, through M.S. Industries, selected and contracted for six buildings; Ruonala and Company later authenticated the construction agreements without Williams Carpet's knowledge.
- Invoices were directed to Ruonala and Company; Williams Carpet was promised payment by Skelly and continued work after assurances, despite lack of full payment.
- Williams Carpet threatened a mechanic’s lien after incomplete payment; Skelly urged Williams Carpet to complete the work and promised payment thereafter.
- Total paid to Williams Carpet: partial sums; remaining balance substantial; Skelly and Martini personally benefited financially from the project.
- Trial court granted JNOV to Skelly on quantum meruit; Williams Carpet appealed; issue centered on whether MS Industries paid full contract price.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was JNOV proper on quantum meruit? | Williams argues MS paid less than full price; evidence supports unjust enrichment. | Skelly contends MS overpaid or payment settled, supporting JNOV. | JNOV reversed; jury could credit quantum meruit. |
| Does evidence show Ruonala was not fully paid? | Williams presented spreadsheets and testimony showing underpayment. | Skelly claimed MS paid full price or that payments went to subcontractors; evidence is conflicting. | Underscores error in JNOV; material dispute remained. |
| Does failure to pursue a mechanic’s lien bar quantum meruit? | Failure to file lien should not bar recovery if unjust enrichment proven. | Lien failure could bar recovery in some jurisdictions. | Not barred; lien failure does not automatically preclude quantum meruit. |
| Can quantum meruit recover where an express contract existed? | Even with contract, quantum meruit may apply as alternate remedy if contract not fully enforceable. | Express contract may bar recovery for services covered by that contract. | Contract does not bar Williams’ quantum meruit; contract existence did not prevent recovery here. |
Key Cases Cited
- Swanson v. Stratos, 350 S.C. 116 (Ct.App. 2002) (elements of quantum meruit and unjust enrichment)
- Earthscapes Unlimited, Inc. v. Ulbrich, 390 S.C. 609 (Ct. App. 2010) (quantum meruit as alternate remedy despite contract)
- Columbia Wholesale Co. v. Scudder May N.V., 312 S.C. 259 (1994) (failure to pursue mechanic’s lien not per se bar)
- JAS-DIP Props. SC, LLC v. Estate of Richardson, 395 S.C. 633 (Ct. App. 2011) (contract vs. quantum meruit as alternative remedies)