Quantum meruit is an equitable remedy that is based upon the promise implied by law to pay for beneficial services rendered and knowingly accepted. The purpose of this common law doctrine is to prevent a party from being unjustly enriched by retaining the benefits of the performance without paying anything in return.

To recover under a quantum meruit claim, a claimant must prove that: (1) valuable services were rendered or materials furnished; (2) for the person sought to be charged; (3) those services and materials were accepted by the person sought to be charged, and were used and enjoyed by him; and (4) the person sought to be charged was reasonably notified that the plaintiff performing such services or furnishing such materials was expecting to be paid by the person sought to be charged.

Pleading In The Alternative

A party generally cannot recover under a quantum meruit claim when there is a valid contract covering the services or materials furnished. The measure of damages for recovery under a quantum meruit theory is the reasonable value of the work performed and the materials furnished.

But a party to a contract may seek alternative relief under both contract and quasi-contract theories. And pleading in the alternative does not defeat the effect of an arbitration clause that broadly covers all disputes between signatories that arise out of the underlying agreement.

In California, quantum meruit is a legal principle that allows an individual or entity to recover compensation for services rendered or materials provided, even in the absence of a formal contract. To succeed in a quantum meruit claim, the claimant must demonstrate that they provided valuable services or materials to the defendant, that the defendant accepted and benefited from these services or materials, and that the defendant was aware or should have been aware that the claimant expected to be paid. However, if there is an existing valid contract that covers the services or materials provided, a quantum meruit claim typically cannot be pursued. Despite this, California law permits parties to plead in the alternative, meaning a claimant can seek recovery under both contract and quasi-contract (quantum meruit) theories. This approach does not invalidate an arbitration clause in a contract that broadly encompasses all disputes arising from the agreement. Therefore, even if a party is pursuing an alternative quasi-contractual remedy, they may still be bound by the arbitration clause of the underlying contract.