Court Opinion

ID: 9687448
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:28:25.236636+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:27.464197
License: Public Domain

Boslaugh, MeCown, and Spencer, JJ.,
concurring.
We concur in the decision of the, court that the judgment of the district court as modified should be affirmed upon the ground that the contract between the parties was severable and the record will support a finding of substantial performance of the contract to construct the basement.
We do not agree that a party may recover on a quantum meruit basis for partial performance for the value of benefits conferred even though he abandons the contract or refuses to perform it, subject to any counterclaim for damages that the other party has sustained by reason of the breach of the agreement. Generally, substantial performance is a condition precedent to any recovery where there is an express contract between the parties. See, Rickertsen v. Carskadon, 172 Neb. 46, 108 N. W. 2d 392; McGowan v. Gate City Malt Co., 89 Neb. 10, 130 N. W. 965.
Recovery upon a quantum meruit basis where there has been no substantial performance should be limited to the circumstances specified in Restatement, Contracts, § 357, p. 623.