Implied In Fact Contract

227 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Commerce P'ship 8098 Ltd. P'ship & Forest-English, Inc. v. Equity Contracting Co., Inc.
  695 So. 2d 383· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-03-26 ·cited 140×
  A subcontractor sued a property owner for quantum meruit/unjust enrichment after the general contractor failed to pay for stucco work. The court reversed the judgment, holding that a subcontractor must prove the owner received the benefit without paying anyone for it, and clarify
• Cook & Nichol, Inc. v. The Plimsoll Club
  451 F.2d 505· 5th Cir.· 1971-09-28 ·cited 113×
• Bloomgarden v. Coyer
  479 F.2d 201· D.C. Cir.· 1973-05-09 ·cited 85×
  A party cannot recover a finder's fee for services if they did not expect personal compensation at the time the services were rendered and the recipient had no reasonable grounds to believe such compensation was expected.
• Sheehan v. Army & AIR Force Exch. Serv.
  619 F.2d 1132· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-27 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the district court has subject matter jurisdiction over Sheehan's wrongful discharge claim against AAFES, based on the Tucker Act for monetary relief and federal question jurisdiction combined with the Administrative Procedure Act for nonmonetary relief.
• A.J. v. State
  677 So. 2d 935· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-07-24 ·cited 66×
  A 15-year-old juvenile who pleaded guilty to aggravated battery challenges the admission of medical bills in a restitution hearing and the restitution amount imposed. The court held that medical bills are non-hearsay evidence of contract formation and admissible, but reversed the
• Telechron, Inc. v. Parissi
  197 F.2d 757· 2d Cir.· 1952-06-17 ·cited 65×
  The court held that the district court had dependent jurisdiction over the non-patent claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1338(b) and abused its discretion by refusing to hear them, given the extensive trial already conducted.
• Algonac Mfg. Co. (a Close Mich. Corporation) & John A. Maxwell v. The United States
  428 F.2d 1241· Ct. Cl.· 1970-07-15 ·cited 62×
  The court held that John A. Maxwell was not a proper party to sue on contract claims as he was not the real party in interest, and that tort claims were outside the court's jurisdiction. Claims for the ninth contract were barred by the statute of limitations, and other claims wer
• Cont'l Cas. Co. v. Schaefer
  173 F.2d 5· 9th Cir.· 1949-02-11 ·cited 62×
  The court held that a surety under the Miller Act is liable for the reasonable value of labor and materials furnished under an implied agreement for extra work, even if not strictly within the original contract, and that attorneys' fees for an appeal must be sought in a court of
• Porter v. The United States
  496 F.2d 583· Ct. Cl.· 1974-05-15 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the contract in question was not made by an agency of the United States, and other conclusions of the court are inescapable.
• Variety Child's. Hosp., Inc. v. Vigliotti
  385 So. 2d 1052· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-06-10 ·cited 52×
  Variety Children's Hospital sought to recover payment for medical services rendered to a minor child from both the father (who signed a written payment agreement) and the mother (who did not sign but knew of and benefited from the services). The trial court dismissed the claim ag
• Sorosky v. Burroughs Corp.
  826 F.2d 794· 9th Cir.· 1987-08-25 ·cited 51×
  The court held that removal jurisdiction was proper because the plaintiff's state law claims were completely preempted by ERISA, creating a federal question. The court also reversed summary judgment on claims for breach of implied-in-fact contract and breach of the implied covena
• Ratta v. Ratta
  927 So. 2d 1055· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-05-10 ·cited 48×
  James Della Ratta appeals the dismissal of his complaint against his mother and stepfather for unjust enrichment and equitable lien. The Fourth District reversed, holding that the complaint adequately stated both causes of action despite the family relationship between the partie
• The Chedd-Angier Prod. Co., Inc. v. Omni Publ'ns Int'l, Ltd.
  756 F.2d 930· 1st Cir.· 1985-03-15 ·cited 48×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict and the denial of motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial, finding sufficient evidence supported the jury's findings of an oral contract and breach, and that the district court did not err in its rulings or jury instru
• Firchau v. Diamond Nat'l Corp.
  345 F.2d 269· 9th Cir.· 1965-04-26 ·cited 48×
  A notice of appeal filed before the entry of a final judgment may be treated as directed to the final judgment if it is timely filed after entry and the defect does not affect substantial rights. An amended complaint relates back to the original filing if it arises from the same
• Perma Research & Dev. v. The Singer Co.
  542 F.2d 111· 2d Cir.· 1976-07-01 ·cited 42×
  The court held that Singer breached its contract by failing to use its best efforts to perfect and market the anti-skid device, and that the damages awarded were not speculative.
• Benes v. United States
  276 F.2d 99· 6th Cir.· 1960-03-21 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the trial court's misstatements of fact and distortion of the defendant's defense in its jury instructions constituted prejudicial error requiring reversal and remand for a new trial.
• J. C. Pitman & Sons, Inc. v. The United States
  317 F.2d 366· Ct. Cl.· 1963-05-10 ·cited 38×
  The court held that plaintiff failed to establish a claim for an implied contract with the United States because the payment was voluntary and lacked sufficient notice to the government of any mistake or fraud.
• Russell Corp. v. The United States
  537 F.2d 474· Ct. Cl.· 1976-07-09 ·cited 36×
  The court held that no binding contract was formed because GSA regional representatives acted within their authority to withdraw from negotiations before final execution, and subsequent administrative approvals did not create a contract without mutual assent.
• Havenfield Corp. v. H & R Block, Inc.
  509 F.2d 1263· 8th Cir.· 1975-01-30 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to apply the New York Statute of Frauds, in directing a verdict on liability, or in refusing to allow supplemental answers to interrogatories.
• Putnam Mills Corp. v. The United States
  479 F.2d 1334· Ct. Cl.· 1973-06-20 ·cited 36×
  The Court of Claims held that the plaintiff's failure to comply with its subcontract terms relieved the United States of any potential liability under the alleged contract, and granted summary judgment for the defendant.
• Mendez v. Hampton Court Nursing Ctr., LLC
  203 So. 3d 146· Fla.· 2016-09-22 ·cited 34×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a nursing home resident is not bound by an arbitration clause in an admission contract signed by the resident's adult son, where the resident neither signed the contract nor otherwise agreed to it. The Court rejected the third-party beneficiary
• Alliance Assurance Co., Ltd. v. United States
  252 F.2d 529· 2d Cir.· 1958-02-10 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the loss of goods from government custody gives rise to a claim under the Tucker Act for breach of implied contract and under the FTCA for negligence, and that the government failed to rebut the presumption of negligence.
• Interform Co. v. Mitchell
  575 F.2d 1270· 9th Cir.· 1978-05-03 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the trial court correctly determined the parties' intent regarding the contract for the first job and awarded damages for unjust enrichment for the second job, but erred in denying attorney's fees.
• First Nat'l Bank of Emlenton v. United States
  265 F.2d 297· 3d Cir.· 1959-03-18 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the bank's suit against the United States for wrongful withholding of sale proceeds was not maintainable as the United States had not consented to be sued under the cited statutes.
• Landsberg v. Scrabble Crossword Game Players, Inc.
  736 F.2d 485· 9th Cir.· 1984-03-05 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the defendant's actions did not constitute copyright infringement because the similarities between the works related to unprotectable ideas or stock expressions, but remanded for consideration of a breach of contract claim.
• Penn-Ohio Steel Corp. v. The United States
  354 F.2d 254· Ct. Cl.· 1965-12-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover damages for breach of the "reverter agreement" for the period the Navy failed to allow re-occupancy.
• Garrido v. Burger King Corp.
  558 So. 2d 79· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-02-27 ·cited 25×
  Garrido, an advertising firm, appeals summary judgment dismissing claims against Burger King for allegedly using its advertising campaign ideas without compensation. The court affirms dismissal of conversion, theft, and conspiracy claims as preempted by the Copyright Act, but rev
• N.Y. Airways, Inc. v. The United States
  369 F.2d 743· Ct. Cl.· 1966-12-16 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the Civil Aeronautics Board has the authority to obligate the United States for subsidy payments to air carriers, even in the absence of specific congressional appropriations, and that appropriation acts do not amend this substantive power unless the intent is
• Martin v. Campanaro
  156 F.2d 127· 2d Cir.· 1946-06-05 ·cited 23×
  The court held that claimants can prove claims for the difference between the reasonable value of their services and amounts paid, based on a contract implied in fact.
• Cool v. Int'l Shoe Co.
  142 F.2d 318· 8th Cir.· 1944-05-03 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the complaint, despite its prolixity, stated a claim upon which relief could be granted and should not have been dismissed with prejudice.
• Sharick v. Se. Univ. OF THE Health Scis., Inc.
  780 So. 2d 136· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-08-02 ·cited 22×
  Keith Sharick, a fourth-year medical student dismissed from Southeastern University of the Health Sciences one month before graduation, sued for breach of implied-in-fact contract. The jury found the dismissal arbitrary and capricious, but the trial court limited damages to tuiti
• Cartee v. The Fla. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs.
  354 So. 2d 81· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-12-20 ·cited 22×
  Winewood Investments challenged the dismissal of its complaint against the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services for breach of a commercial lease agreement. The court held that Winewood stated a valid cause of action for breach of contract and reversed the dism
• Shannon v. United States
  235 F.2d 457· 2d Cir.· 1956-07-31 ·cited 22×
  The stevedoring employer is liable over to the shipowner for damages paid to an injured employee if the employer breached an express agreement to indemnify the owner.
• Baron v. Ahmed M. Osman
  39 So. 3d 449· Fla. 5th DCA· 2010-07-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the second amended complaint sufficiently stated causes of action for breach of contract and quasi-contract.
• ATL, Inc. v. The United States
  736 F.2d 677· Fed. Cir.· 1984-05-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Claims Court had jurisdiction and that while the Navy's notice of charges was sufficient, its failure to provide further information to the contractor denied due process. The court reversed the lower court's findings on the adequacy of the proceeding and t
• McINTOSH v. Harbour Club Villas Condo. Ass'n
  468 So. 2d 1075· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-05-14 ·cited 19×
  Genuine issues of material fact exist regarding breach of contract, contract implied in fact, quasi contract, and breach of fiduciary duty/constructive trust, precluding summary judgment on those counts. However, summary judgment was properly granted for tortious interference wit
• H.F. Allen Orchards v. The United States
  749 F.2d 1571· Fed. Cir.· 1984-12-10 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the Bureau of Reclamation had no contractual obligation to accurately forecast water supply, and therefore, the farmers' claims for damages due to an inaccurate forecast failed.
• Bushkin Assocs., Inc. v. Raytheon Co.
  815 F.2d 142· 1st Cir.· 1987-03-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a jury could reasonably find that Raytheon's interest in acquiring Beech Aircraft was rekindled within the contract term, and that the district court erred in directing a verdict on the quantum meruit and implied-in-fact contract claims.
• The AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. The United States
  655 F.2d 1047· Ct. Cl.· 1981-06-17 ·cited 16×
  The court held that plaintiffs were not entitled to monetary relief from general Treasury funds under the Tucker Act, but HUD might be liable from separate funds.
• Cities Serv. GAS Co. v. The United States
  500 F.2d 448· Ct. Cl.· 1974-07-19 ·cited 16×
  The court held that it has jurisdiction over claims based on contracts implied in fact against the United States and that the plaintiff established such a contract for gas sales to the Army, which were direct sales not subject to FPC rate regulation.
• Cutler-Hammer v. The United States
  441 F.2d 1179· Ct. Cl.· 1971-05-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the plaintiffs had no actionable claim because the Treasury Department's regulation and subsequent acknowledgements did not constitute a contract, as there was no clear promise to sell silver and applications were subject to approval.
• Farm Sec. Admin. v. Herren
  165 F.2d 554· 8th Cir.· 1948-01-12 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the United States did not contract to pay rent or damages for waste on the leased property, as the lease clearly distinguished the lessee from the government and no authorized official signed the lease on behalf of the United States.
• Sharick v. Se. Univ. OF THE Health Scis., Inc.
  891 So. 2d 562· Fla. 3d DCA· 2004-11-10 ·cited 15×
  Keith Sharick appeals an order enforcing a settlement agreement negotiated by his attorney, Donald Tobkin, without clear authorization from Sharick to do so. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that an attorney's authority to settle must be clear and unequivocal,
• Quayside Assocs., Ltd. v. Triefler
  506 So. 2d 6· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-03-03 ·cited 15×
  Quayside Associates and La Ville appealed a jury verdict finding an implied contract (but no express contract) and awarding a real estate salesman damages based on the express contract terms. The court affirmed, holding that sufficient evidence supported an implied contract claim
• Midcoast Aviation, Inc. v. Gen. Elec. Credit Corp.
  907 F.2d 732· 7th Cir.· 1990-07-24 ·cited 14×
  The court should have instructed the jury on the defendant's theory of the case regarding officious and gratuitous services.
• Commc'ns Maint., Inc. v. Motorola, Inc.
  761 F.2d 1202· 7th Cir.· 1985-05-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that CMI's claims under the Indiana Franchise Act failed because no franchise fee was paid, its jury demand was untimely, and the termination clause was not unconscionable or subject to implied terms.
• DR. Franklin Perkins Sch. v. Freeman
  741 F.2d 1503· 7th Cir.· 1984-08-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the School failed to establish an implied-in-fact contract or quantum meruit claim for retroactive tuition increases for the 1979-1980 academic year, and that the district court erred in awarding costs to the School.
• Grismac Corp. v. The United States
  556 F.2d 494· Ct. Cl.· 1977-05-18 ·cited 14×
  Government officials lacked the authority to enter into express or implied contracts for the purchase of mere suggestions, and therefore, the suit under the Tucker Act cannot be maintained.
• Collins v. The United States
  532 F.2d 1344· Ct. Cl.· 1976-04-14 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the plaintiff has standing to bring a tax refund action and is not barred from recovery as a volunteer due to a mutual mistake of fact.
• Colonial Metals Co. v. The United States
  494 F.2d 1355· Ct. Cl.· 1974-04-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a termination for convenience clause allows the government to terminate a contract to obtain a lower price, even if that price was known at the time of award, and that anticipatory profits are not recoverable in a termination for convenience settlement.