County Commissioners v. J. Roland Dashiell & Sons, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, “generally, quasi-contract claims such as quantum meruit and unjust enrichment cannot be asserted where an express contract ... exists”
• holding that a contract implied in law cannot supplant an express contract governing the same subject
• holding that a contract implied in law cannot supplant an express contract governing the same subject
• holding that, generally, quasi-contract claims such as quantum meruit cannot be asserted when an express contract defining the rights and remedies of the parties exists
• Concluding that where a contract covers certain subject matter, the parties are limited to the remedies provided in the contract, and cannot resort to theories dependent on quasi-contract or unjust enrichment
• explaining that, “generally, quasi-contract claims such as quantum meruit and unjust enrichment cannot be asserted where an express contract ... exists”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).