Unjust enrichment – Construction Law Musings- Richmond, VA

Unjust Enrichment and Express Contract Don’t Mix

Express Contract I am a huge fan of clearly written construction contracts. Virginia state and federal courts will interpret contract provisions as written and will seek to enforce all of those terms where possible. Where the contract is ambiguous, we construction attorneys make money and the courts are forced to make decisions that the parties may not like.

A recent case out of the Eastern District of Virginia federal court highlights the ways in which a clear contract affects the claims that can be brought and limits the scope of possible litigation. In First Call Environmental LLC v. Murphy Oil USA LLC, the Court looked at a relatively typical Owner, Contractor, Subcontractor set of agreements. In this matter, Murphy Oil entered a contract with National Rapid Response, Inc. (“NRR”) whereby NRR would provide emergency and environmental management and waste disposal services to Murphy Oil. NRR then subcontracted with the Plaintiff First Call to perform the services for Murphy Oil. First Call filed suit against Murphy Oil alleging two counts: breach of contract (based on a third-party beneficiary theory), and unjust enrichment. Continue reading Unjust Enrichment and Express Contract Don’t Mix

Recent Construction Law Opinion Roundup

Originally posted 2014-01-20 09:00:06.

The Virginia welcome sign at the Virginia welcome center on I-95. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Well, now that my suggestion of a new year’s resolution and quick review of a recent (and funny) book are done, we’re back to the more mundane, yet no less relevant, discussion of recent construction opinions here in Virginia.

In the last quarter of 2013, the Virginia Circuit Courts in Norfolk and Richmond came out with opinions of interest to construction contractors and subcontractors.

Continue reading Recent Construction Law Opinion Roundup

An Interesting Take on Unjust Enrichment from the Virginia Supreme Court

Construction jobs involve numerous contractual relationships between and among general contractors, suppliers, architects, and subcontractors (to name a few of the relationships). In most cases, aside from exceptions such as mechanic’s liens, the concept of contractual privity keeps those “lower” on the contractual chain from jumping over the party with whom that company has a contract (for instance a supplier contract with a subcontractor) and suing a different party (for instance the general contractor). Recently the Virginia Supreme Court (over a lengthy dissent) provided a limited exception to this general rule in the context of unjust enrichment and joint check agreements. Continue reading An Interesting Take on Unjust Enrichment from the Virginia Supreme Court

Reminder: Quantum Meruit and Breach of Construction Contract Don’t Mix

Map of the United States District Courts in Virginia (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Construction contracts (preferably written ones) are near and dear to my heart here at Construction Law Musings. In a world where the contract is king, having a written construction agreement is a key component of any properly run construction project. However, even with the best construction contract there are claims (Murphy was an optimist after all).

When making these claims, we construction lawyers tend to plead both the breach of contract and quantum meruit (or in non lawyer speak- unjust enrichment) when drafting a complaint in a construction dispute. A recent case out of the Western District of Virginia federal district court reminds us all that these two counts must be plead alternatively because they simply cannot exist in a lawsuit from beginning to end.

Continue reading Reminder: Quantum Meruit and Breach of Construction Contract Don’t Mix