CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Quantum Maintenance Corp. v. Mercy College

Quantum entered into a maintenance contract with Mercy College which included a non-compete clause preventing Mercy from employing Quantum's personnel for two years post-termination. After Mercy terminated the contract, Aramark took over the maintenance services and subsequently hired Quantum's former employees. Quantum filed a lawsuit against Aramark, alleging tortious interference with contract, claiming Aramark induced Mercy to breach the non-compete clause. Aramark sought to dismiss the complaint, arguing the contract only restricted Mercy from direct hiring and that it could not be held liable as an agent. The court denied Aramark's motion, determining that the term 'engage' in the contract could be interpreted broadly to encompass hiring through a third-party contractor and that Aramark's alleged actions might have been for its self-interest, negating its agency defense.

tortious interference with contractnon-compete clausecontract interpretationmotion to dismissagency relationshipbreach of contractmaintenance servicespersonnel clauseemployer-employee relationsthird-party liability
References
33
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 25, 2005

Candreva v. Ultra Kote Applied Technology, Ltd.

This case involves an appeal by the defendants regarding an order denying their motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff, a mechanic, sought damages for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and quantum meruit for services rendered in assembling machines for the defendants, one of whom, Joseph Frazzitta, patented the underlying theory. The appellate court modified the lower court's order, granting summary judgment to the defendants only to the extent that the quantum meruit claim was based on the plaintiff's entitlement to a share of profits from patent licensing and machine sales. The remainder of the order, specifically regarding the plaintiff's entitlement to the reasonable value of services in designing and building machines, was affirmed.

Breach of ContractUnjust EnrichmentQuantum MeruitSummary JudgmentAppellate ProcedurePatent RightsRoyaltiesServices RenderedCivil LitigationSuffolk County
References
1
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Velu v. Velocity Express, Inc.

Trevor Velu, a delivery driver, sued Velocity Express, Inc. (VEI) alleging unpaid wages and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law, contending he was an employee. He also brought claims for breach of contract and quantum meruit related to a fuel surcharge. The Court determined that Velu was an independent contractor, not an employee, under both federal and state labor laws, leading to the dismissal of his wage and overtime claims. Summary judgment was denied for both parties on the breach of contract claim due to an unclear definition of 'net revenue' concerning the fuel surcharge. The quantum meruit claim was dismissed because a valid agreement existed between the parties.

FLSAIndependent ContractorEmployee StatusNew York Labor LawSummary JudgmentBreach of ContractQuantum MeruitDelivery DriverWage DisputeOvertime
References
24
Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 03616 [239 AD3d 1125]
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 12, 2025

Schott v. Lucatelli

Plaintiff, David Schott, sued defendant, Gina Lucatelli, for unpaid construction work on a home in Tompkins County, which he started building for her in 2018 without a written contract due to their familial relationship. A dispute arose in January 2020 over growing costs, and defendant subsequently locked plaintiff out of the unfinished home. Following a nonjury trial, Supreme Court awarded plaintiff $43,400 based on quantum meruit for the reasonable value of his services from May 2019 through January 2020, reduced by $12,750 for defective work, and dismissed defendant's breach of contract counterclaims. The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed both the Supreme Court's order and judgment, upholding the quantum meruit award and the grant of prejudgment interest.

Quantum MeruitConstruction ContractUnjust EnrichmentPrejudgment InterestNonjury TrialAppellate ReviewReasonable Value of ServicesDefective WorkFamilial RelationshipGeneral Business Law § 771
References
23
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 03427 [172 AD3d 1501]
Regular Panel Decision
May 02, 2019

Jaeger v. Bellavia

This case concerns an appeal from an order of the Supreme Court related to a dispute over an oral agreement for home renovation work between plaintiff James A. Jaeger Jr. and defendant Leonard A. Bellavia. Plaintiff sued for breach of contract and quantum meruit, while defendant counterclaimed for trespass and negligence. The Supreme Court dismissed the breach of contract claim due to the lack of a written home improvement contract under General Business Law article 36-A, but granted plaintiff $9,600 on the quantum meruit claim and dismissed defendant's counterclaims. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, found that plaintiff failed to establish entitlement to recover for work performed in October 2012 but did prove reasonable value for work in December 2012. Consequently, the court modified the damages awarded to plaintiff, reducing them from $9,600 to $1,600, and affirmed the order as modified.

Breach of ContractQuantum MeruitOral AgreementHome Improvement ContractGeneral Business LawDamagesNonjury TrialAppellate ReviewContract DisputeServices Performed
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Cox v. NAP Construction Co.

Plaintiffs, a certified class of laborers, brought an action against NAP Construction Company, Inc., its principals, and insurance sureties, alleging failure to pay prevailing wage rates, supplemental benefits, and overtime for public works projects. Claims included breach of contract, quantum meruit, fraud, unjust enrichment, and violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The court dismissed the breach of contract, quantum meruit, and unjust enrichment claims, ruling that a private right of action does not exist under the Davis-Bacon Act. However, the court denied the motion to dismiss claims under the Labor Law and Fair Labor Standards Act, finding that the Davis-Bacon Act does not preempt state labor laws nor does it preclude FLSA claims for overtime in this context. The motion to dismiss was thus granted in part and denied in part.

Prevailing WageOvertime CompensationDavis-Bacon ActLabor LawFair Labor Standards ActPublic Works ContractsWage and Hour ClaimsPreemption DoctrineBreach of ContractQuantum Meruit
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

SLC Consultants/Constructors, Inc. v. County of Chautauqua

The Supreme Court erred in denying the defendant's motion for summary judgment on the fifth and sixth causes of action and in granting the plaintiff's cross-motion to amend the complaint to include a quantum meruit claim. The fifth cause of action, alleging damages due to the defendant's failure to provide soil tests, was dismissed as the defendant had no contractual duty to provide them, and the plaintiff failed to present admissible evidence. The sixth cause of action, regarding damages from a project size reduction, was dismissed because the contract allowed the defendant to modify the work without incurring liability for damages. The quantum meruit claim was deemed lacking in merit as a valid written contract governed the dispute. Therefore, the Supreme Court's order was modified to grant the defendant's summary judgment motion for the fifth and sixth causes of action and deny the plaintiff's cross-motion to amend, and affirmed in all other respects.

Summary JudgmentContract LawQuantum MeruitBreach of ContractAppellate ReviewMotion to AmendContractual DutyProject DelayDamagesEvidentiary Proof
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Hyman v. Schwartz

This case involves an appeal from an order denying the plaintiff's motion to dismiss several counterclaims filed by defendant Arthur Schwartz. Plaintiff, identified as Hyman from prior related cases, initially sued Schwartz and his law firm for legal malpractice and emotional distress. Schwartz, a licensed attorney who previously represented Hyman, subsequently asserted four counterclaims: breach of contract, quantum meruit, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and prima facie tort. The Supreme Court denied Hyman's motion to dismiss these counterclaims. On appeal, the court modified the lower court's order. It affirmed the denial of dismissal for the quantum meruit counterclaim, finding Schwartz adequately stated a cause of action. However, the appellate court reversed the denial and dismissed the counterclaims for breach of contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and prima facie tort, concluding that documentary evidence contradicted the breach of contract claim and the alleged conduct for emotional distress and prima facie tort did not meet the required legal thresholds. The court also affirmed the denial of Hyman's motion to renew her claims regarding proper service on Schwartz's former partners, Stuart Lichten and Daniel Bright.

Legal MalpracticeCounterclaimsBreach of ContractQuantum MeruitIntentional Infliction of Emotional DistressPrima Facie TortMotion to DismissAppellate ReviewCivil ProcedureService of Process
References
35
Case No. ADJ7658934
Regular
Nov 28, 2017

RUSSELL HULL vs. TULARE DISTRICT HOSPITAL

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted reconsideration of a prior award that disallowed a lien claimant's attorney fees. The WCAB found that the original award lacked substantial evidence and a clear explanation for disallowing the lien on a quantum meruit basis. Therefore, the WCAB rescinded the award and returned the case to the trial level for further proceedings, including a lien conference to address the lien claimant's claim on its merits.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationStipulations with Request for AwardDisallowed LienAttorney's FeesQuantum MeruitSubstantial EvidenceWCJ ErrorLien ConferenceRescinded Award
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 09, 2014

CELLINO & BARNES, P.C. v. LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTOPHER J. CASSAR

This appeal arises from a dispute between two law firms concerning attorney's fees. The plaintiff law firm initially represented a client in a personal injury action. The client subsequently discharged the plaintiff and retained the defendant law firms. The plaintiff then commenced an action against the defendants in Erie County, seeking attorney's fees on a quantum meruit basis and alleging frivolous and fraudulent conduct. The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint and to transfer venue. The court granted the dismissal of the second and third causes of action related to frivolous and fraudulent conduct but affirmed the denial of dismissal for the first cause of action and the denial of the motion to transfer venue.

Attorney's FeesCharging LienQuantum MeruitLegal MalpracticeFrivolous ConductFraudMotion to DismissVenue TransferCPLR 3211CPLR 510
References
13
Showing 1-10 of 33 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational