NEW YORK-CONNECTICUT DEVELOPMENT CORP. VS. BLINDS-TO-
GO (U.S.) INC. VS. ANTHONY NARDOZZI, ET AL.
UNIQUE MECHANICAL SERVICES, LLC. VS. NEW YORK- CONNECTICUT DEVELOPMENT CORP.
COUNTY GLASS & METAL INSTALLERS, INC. VS. NEW YORK- CONNECTICUT DEVELOPMENT CORP., ET AL.
A-5660-14T4
UNIQUE MECHANICAL SERVICES, LLC. VS. NEW YORK- CONNECTICUT DEVELOPMENT CORP.
COUNTY GLASS & METAL INSTALLERS, INC. VS. NEW YORK- CONNECTICUT DEVELOPMENT CORP., ET AL.
A-5660-14T4
In this matter arising out of the construction of a
building, we address whether a verdict can be sustained where
the jury found that plaintiff, New York-Connecticut Development
Corp. (NYCT), breached the pertinent contract, but nevertheless,
awarded it damages under a quantum meruit theory.
Quantum meruit is a form of quasi-contractual recovery and is "wholly unlike an express or implied-in-fact contract in that it is 'imposed by the law for the purpose of bringing about justice without reference to the intention of the parties.'" St. Barnabas Med. Ctr. v. Cnty. of Essex, 111 N.J. 67, 79 (1988)
Quantum meruit is a form of quasi-contractual recovery and is "wholly unlike an express or implied-in-fact contract in that it is 'imposed by the law for the purpose of bringing about justice without reference to the intention of the parties.'" St. Barnabas Med. Ctr. v. Cnty. of Essex, 111 N.J. 67, 79 (1988)
(citations omitted). It has long been recognized, however,
"that the existence of an express contract excludes the awarding
of relief regarding the same subject matter based on quantum
meruit." Kas Oriental Rugs v. Ellman, 394 N.J. Super. 278, 286
(App. Div. 2007).
Although a party may plead and pursue alternative, and even inconsistent theories, Kas, supra, 394 N.J. Super. at 287, a party is not entitled to recover on inconsistent theories. Ibid. (emphasis added). Once the jury determined that an express contract existed between the parties, it was erroneous for it to be directed to a consideration of quantum meruit. The jury instructions and verdict sheet both misstated the applicable legal principles of contract law. Consequently, we are constrained to reverse and remand for a new trial.
Although a party may plead and pursue alternative, and even inconsistent theories, Kas, supra, 394 N.J. Super. at 287, a party is not entitled to recover on inconsistent theories. Ibid. (emphasis added). Once the jury determined that an express contract existed between the parties, it was erroneous for it to be directed to a consideration of quantum meruit. The jury instructions and verdict sheet both misstated the applicable legal principles of contract law. Consequently, we are constrained to reverse and remand for a new trial.
