Opinion ID: 196752
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Unjust Enrichment and Quantum Meruit

Text: 32 Hodgkins also seeks damages under unjust enrichment and quantum meruit theories. Under Maine law, [u]njust enrichment describes recovery for the value of the benefit retained when there is no contractual relationship, but when, on the grounds of fairness and justice, the law compels performance of a legal and moral duty to pay, while quantum meruit involves recovery for services or materials provided under an implied contract. Aladdin Elec. Assoc. v. Town of Old Orchard Beach, 645 A.2d 1142, 1145 (Me.1994); see A.F.A.B., Inc. v. Town of Old Orchard Beach, 639 A.2d 103, 105 n. 3 (Me.1994). 33 We have already discussed and upheld the district court's finding of an enforceable agreement between NET and Hodgkins. Without evidence of fraud, or other circumstances that render the contract inoperative, Hodgkins is foreclosed from seeking additional payment outside the contract terms. See Top of the Track, 654 A.2d at 1296 (contract between the parties forecloses unjust enrichment claim); Prest v. Inhabitants of Farmington, 117 Me. 348, 104 A. 521, 524 (1918) (valid express contract forecloses a quantum meruit action). Because Hodgkins has put forth no such evidence, we agree with the district court that Hodgkins' unjust enrichment and quantum meruit claims must fail. 34