Earhart v. William Low Co.

25 Cal.3d 503 (1979)

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

Earhart (P) claims that D urged him to begin work on a mobile home park. P expended sums in commencing construction of the park on land owned by D and on adjacent land owned by a third party. The balance of the land was owned by Ervie Pillow and D, and Pillow entered into a contract in which Pillow agreed to sell her land to D on the condition that D obtain financing for the mobile home park. A special use permit allowed construction of the park, but that permit was set to expire unless work began almost immediately. D informed P two days before the expiration of the use permit that he had obtained financing and urged P to commence work immediately; P did so. P then learned that D had lied to him and had not secured financing and that D had even signed a construction contract with another firm. D refused to compensate P for his services and P sued in quantum meruit. The trial court awarded P damages for the work done on D's land but not on the land of the third party; it is an established proposition of law in California that you can’t get recovery for services furnished to a third person, even though the services were furnished at the request of D. Even though P may render services or delivers a product, if it is of no value to D, then D doesn’t pay under quantum meruit. All D must pay for is the reasonable value of what he got, notwithstanding how much it cost P to produce that value. P appealed.