Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
17 Florida opinions name it 3 courts 1982–2025 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Osteen v. Morrisgreen2 sentences2025Conclusion made prior to their resolution.” Lieberman v. Collision Specialists, Inc., 526 So. 2d 102, 103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). 6 Relying on Osteen v. Morris, 481 So. 2d 1287, 1290 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986) – wherein the Fifth District found that the 1986 version of the Motor Vehicle Repair Act precluded a repair shop’s quantum meruit claim – the Doral Collision Center court found that the 2018 version of the Motor Vehicle Repair Act similarly precluded a repair shop’s unjust enrichment claim. 1999Osteen v. Morris, 481 So.2d 1287, 1289-90 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Moncrief v. Hall, 63 So.2d 640, 642 (Fla.1953) ( en banc ); Interior Design Concepts, Inc. v. Curtin, 473 So.2d 1374 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (as basis for recovery under doctrine of quantum meruit, plaintiff was required to show that services were performed); Miller v. Bill Rivers Trailers, Inc., 450 So.2d 334 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). | 2 | 2 |
McLAUGHLIN, INC. v. RIC-MAN INTERNATIONAL, INC.green1 sentence2025See Manning v. Clark, 89 So. 2d 339, 341 (Fla. 1956) (holding that prejudgment interest on a liquidated damages claim should be calculated from the time the claim became due and was demanded or suit was commenced therefor); Butler Plaza, Inc. v. Allen Trovillion, Inc., 389 So. 2d 682, 683 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (holding that prejudgment interest for debt incurred by the defendant corporation for whom the plaintiff general contractor performed extra work outside the scope of the parties’ written contract should run from the dates of the plaintiff’s demand for payment); see also McLaughlin, 31 So. | 1 | 1 |
Lieberman v. Collision Specialists, Inc.green1 sentence2025Conclusion made prior to their resolution.” Lieberman v. Collision Specialists, Inc., 526 So. 2d 102, 103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). 6 Relying on Osteen v. Morris, 481 So. 2d 1287, 1290 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986) – wherein the Fifth District found that the 1986 version of the Motor Vehicle Repair Act precluded a repair shop’s quantum meruit claim – the Doral Collision Center court found that the 2018 version of the Motor Vehicle Repair Act similarly precluded a repair shop’s unjust enrichment claim. | 1 | 1 |
Manning v. Clarkgreen1 sentence2025See Manning v. Clark, 89 So. 2d 339, 341 (Fla. 1956) (holding that prejudgment interest on a liquidated damages claim should be calculated from the time the claim became due and was demanded or suit was commenced therefor); Butler Plaza, Inc. v. Allen Trovillion, Inc., 389 So. 2d 682, 683 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (holding that prejudgment interest for debt incurred by the defendant corporation for whom the plaintiff general contractor performed extra work outside the scope of the parties’ written contract should run from the dates of the plaintiff’s demand for payment); see also McLaughlin, 31 So. | 1 | 1 |
Butler Plaza, Inc. v. ALLEN TROVILLIONgreen1 sentence2025See Manning v. Clark, 89 So. 2d 339, 341 (Fla. 1956) (holding that prejudgment interest on a liquidated damages claim should be calculated from the time the claim became due and was demanded or suit was commenced therefor); Butler Plaza, Inc. v. Allen Trovillion, Inc., 389 So. 2d 682, 683 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (holding that prejudgment interest for debt incurred by the defendant corporation for whom the plaintiff general contractor performed extra work outside the scope of the parties’ written contract should run from the dates of the plaintiff’s demand for payment); see also McLaughlin, 31 So. | 1 | 1 |
Dausman v. Hartgreen1 sentence2024See Dausman v. Hillsborough Area Reg'l Transit, 898 So. 2d 213, 215 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) ("Leave to amend should be freely given, the more so . . . when the amendment is based on the same conduct, transaction and occurrence upon which the original claim was 6 brought." (ellipsis in original) (quoting Spolski Gen. | 1 | 1 |
Doug Hambel's Plumbing, Inc. v. Conwaygreen1 sentence2011See Hambel’s Plumbing, 831 So.2d at 705-06 . | 1 | 1 |
Vista Designs, Inc. v. Silvermangreen1 sentence2003As we stated with regard to a real estate commission in Bradley v. Banks, 260 So.2d 256, 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972): "The contract being void as a matter of public policy, the services rendered in connection therewith cannot be made the basis for a quantum meruit claim ..." See also Vista Designs, Inc. v. Silverman, 774 So.2d 884, 888 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). | 1 | 1 |
Bradley v. Banksgreen1 sentence2003As we stated with regard to a real estate commission in Bradley v. Banks, 260 So.2d 256, 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972): "The contract being void as a matter of public policy, the services rendered in connection therewith cannot be made the basis for a quantum meruit claim ..." See also Vista Designs, Inc. v. Silverman, 774 So.2d 884, 888 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). | 1 | 1 |
Moncrief v. Hallgreen1 sentence1999Osteen v. Morris, 481 So.2d 1287, 1289-90 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Moncrief v. Hall, 63 So.2d 640, 642 (Fla.1953) ( en banc ); Interior Design Concepts, Inc. v. Curtin, 473 So.2d 1374 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (as basis for recovery under doctrine of quantum meruit, plaintiff was required to show that services were performed); Miller v. Bill Rivers Trailers, Inc., 450 So.2d 334 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). | 1 | 1 |
Perez v. GEORGE & FULMERgreen1 sentence1995See Perez v. George, Hartz, Lundeen, Flagg & Fulmer, ___ So.2d ___, ___ [ 1995 WL 366680 ] (Fla. 3d DCA Case no. 94-1048, opinion filed, June 21, 1995) [20 FLW D1437, D1438]. | 1 | 1 |
SEARCY, DENNEY, SCAROLA v. Poletzgreen1 sentence1995See Searcy, 652 So.2d at 366 , 369 n. 5; Riesgo v. Weinstein, 523 So.2d 752 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). [1] *1202 It should also be noted that since the successor lawyer, the appellant Goldberg, also has a quantum meruit claim against the clients it may be necessary that they obtain new counsel in any further proceedings below. | 1 | 1 |
SEARCY, DENNEY v. Schellergreen1 sentence1994See generally Searcy, Denney, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. v. Scheller, 629 So.2d 947 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), review denied, No. 83,120 (Fla. May 5, 1994). [8] In the present case, however, Gregory elected not to make a quantum meruit claim. | 1 | 1 |
Mediterranean Enterprises, Inc. v. Ssangyong Corporationgreen1 sentence1993See generally Mediterranean Enters. v. Ssangyong Corp., 708 F.2d 1458 , 1463-64 (9th Cir.1983) (distinguishing narrow "arising under" clauses from broader "arising out of or relating to" clauses in the context of a demand to arbitrate a quantum meruit claim). | 1 | 1 |
Broward Builders Exchange, Inc. v. Goehringgreen1 sentence1993Appellees ask this court to affirm the final summary judgment based upon the statute of limitations as applied to each of the causes of action, including quantum meruit, citing Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 1979) (appellate court may affirm a decision if it is supported by a theory different from that relied upon by the trial court). [3] There are no facts in the record before us that would support the application of the two-year provision of section 95.11(4)(c), pertaining to "[a]n action to recover wages or overtime or damages or penalties concerning payment | 1 | 1 |
Logan & Clark, Inc. v. Adaptable Development, Inc.green1 sentence1993See Logan & Clark, Inc. v. Adaptable Dev., Inc., 450 So.2d 1189 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Champagne-Webber, Inc. v. City of Ft. Lauderdale
green
1 sentence2025Id. at 697 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Commerce v. Equity
green
1 sentence2021The doctrine of quantum meruit, also called a contract implied in fact, imposes liability, in the absence of an express agreement, “based on a tacit promise, one that is inferred in whole or in part from the parties’ conduct, not solely from their words.” Id. at 385 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Lackey v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.
green
1 sentence2015Lackey v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 855 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
ITT Hartford Group, Inc. v. Virginia Financial Associates, Inc.
green
1 sentence2010Similarly, in ITT Hartford v. Virginia Financial Associates, Inc. 258 Va. 193 (1999), the Supreme Court reviewed the record of a case where a trial jury found against defendant Hartford on a claim for breach of contract but in Hartford’s favor on a quantum meruit claim. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Quinn v. Advanced Lighting Products, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence2005Id. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Miller v. Bill Rivers Trailers, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence1999Osteen v. Morris, 481 So.2d 1287, 1289-90 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Moncrief v. Hall, 63 So.2d 640, 642 (Fla.1953) ( en banc ); Interior Design Concepts, Inc. v. Curtin, 473 So.2d 1374 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (as basis for recovery under doctrine of quantum meruit, plaintiff was required to show that services were performed); Miller v. Bill Rivers Trailers, Inc., 450 So.2d 334 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Interior Design Concepts, Inc. v. Curtin
neutral
1 sentence1999Osteen v. Morris, 481 So.2d 1287, 1289-90 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Moncrief v. Hall, 63 So.2d 640, 642 (Fla.1953) ( en banc ); Interior Design Concepts, Inc. v. Curtin, 473 So.2d 1374 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (as basis for recovery under doctrine of quantum meruit, plaintiff was required to show that services were performed); Miller v. Bill Rivers Trailers, Inc., 450 So.2d 334 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Riesgo v. Weinstein
green
1 sentence1995See Searcy, 652 So.2d at 366 , 369 n. 5; Riesgo v. Weinstein, 523 So.2d 752 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). [1] *1202 It should also be noted that since the successor lawyer, the appellant Goldberg, also has a quantum meruit claim against the clients it may be necessary that they obtain new counsel in any further proceedings below. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Rosenberg v. Levin
green
1 sentence1994B In Rosenberg v. Levin , the court said: [w]e hold that an attorney employed under a valid [contingent fee] contract who is discharged without cause before the contingency has occurred or before the client's matters have concluded can recover only the reasonable value of his services rendered prior to discharge, limited by the maximum contract fee. 409 So.2d 1016, 1021 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee
green
1 sentence1993Appellees ask this court to affirm the final summary judgment based upon the statute of limitations as applied to each of the causes of action, including quantum meruit, citing Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 1979) (appellate court may affirm a decision if it is supported by a theory different from that relied upon by the trial court). [3] There are no facts in the record before us that would support the application of the two-year provision of section 95.11(4)(c), pertaining to "[a]n action to recover wages or overtime or damages or penalties concerning payment | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Blick v. Mercantile Trust & Deposit Co.
green
1 sentence1993Appellees ask this court to affirm the final summary judgment based upon the statute of limitations as applied to each of the causes of action, including quantum meruit, citing Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 1979) (appellate court may affirm a decision if it is supported by a theory different from that relied upon by the trial court). [3] There are no facts in the record before us that would support the application of the two-year provision of section 95.11(4)(c), pertaining to "[a]n action to recover wages or overtime or damages or penalties concerning payment | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Fracasse v. Brent
green
2 sentences1982The California Supreme Court, in Fracasse v. Brent, 6 Cal.3d 784 , 494 P.2d 9 , 100 Cal. Rptr. 385 (1972), also adopted a quantum meruit rule. 1982The California Supreme Court, in Fracasse v. Brent, 6 Cal.3d 784 , 494 P.2d 9 , 100 Cal. Rptr. 385 (1972), also adopted a quantum meruit rule. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Viking Communities Corp. v. Peeler Const. Co.
green
2 sentences1982Apparently recognizing the problem presented by the trial court's misapplication of the quantum meruit doctrine, the appellee argues on appeal that, despite the contrary language of the judgment, it "is not a judgment in quantum meruit but is in fact a judgment for the full contract price based upon the substantial completion of the project by the appellee ..." In support of this contention appellee relies upon the cases of Oven Development Corporation v. Molisky, 278 So.2d 299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973) and Viking Communities Corporation v. Peeler Construction Company, 367 So.2d 737 (Fla. 4th DCA 19 1982We agree that the doctrine of substantial performance prevails in this state and that "a contractor who substantially performs and is in good faith is entitled to enforce the contract even if performance has been less than complete." Viking, 367 So.2d at 739 . | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Oven Development Corporation v. Molisky
green
1 sentence1982Apparently recognizing the problem presented by the trial court's misapplication of the quantum meruit doctrine, the appellee argues on appeal that, despite the contrary language of the judgment, it "is not a judgment in quantum meruit but is in fact a judgment for the full contract price based upon the substantial completion of the project by the appellee ..." In support of this contention appellee relies upon the cases of Oven Development Corporation v. Molisky, 278 So.2d 299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973) and Viking Communities Corporation v. Peeler Construction Company, 367 So.2d 737 (Fla. 4th DCA 19 | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.