Coon v. Schoenema

476 S.W.2d 439 (1972)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P, under a contract to build eleven houses, sued D, the owner of the lots upon which they were built, to recover a share of the profits from their sale, and in the alternative for the reasonable value of his services as builder. P testified that D had told him he had certain lots in Irving and Arlington and that he needed somebody to build houses on them. D proposed that P build the houses, D would finance them, they would get a third person to sell them, and they would split the profits three ways. P agreed and started building. After he had built seven houses, D told him the rest of the lots had been sold and proposed that P proceed with the project on a different deal, which was that P would pay D $350 a house, D would furnish the lots, and P would get all the profit. P agreed, with the understanding that he would have five houses under construction or ready for sale continuously and that no lots should be sold to other builders in the immediate area. D agreed to these conditions. When P had finished four houses on the Arlington lots and was ready to start a fifth, he discovered that D had sold the rest of the lots and other contractors were preparing to build on lots next to the houses P had built. P built no more houses. D sold the houses and never gave P any of the proceeds. P never received anything for his work. At the trial, P abandoned his claim for profits and sought to recover the value of his services. The trial court excluded evidence of the value of his services and sustained D's motion for instructed verdict. P appealed contending that the trial court erred in refusing to permit proof of the elements of quantum meruit and in refusing to submit issues on quantum meruit.