Ostrowski v. Massa

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the contract only required payment for services used on a per diem basis
• noting that § 15-301 bars oral 14 modifications where contract stated that it “cannot be changed unless mutually agreed upon in 15 writing by both parties” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “[W]here there is an express contract no recovery can be had on a theory of implied contract.” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “[W]here there is an express contract no recovery can be had on a theory of implied contract.” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• quantum meruit claim may be permitted to proceed where the “express contract” has been “in some manner remov[ed] . . . from the picture in the normal fashion (recission, abandonment, etc.)” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).