law-noncontract-theories-of-recovery | quantum meruit | account stated | money had and received | debt |
Contract precludes noncontract claim
Because the deemed admissions conclusively prove the existence of a contract, quantum meruit is not
available as a theory of recovery. Fortune Prod. Co. v. Conoco, Inc., 52 S.W.3d 671, 684 (Tex. 2000) (holding
that because party to contract bound by express agreement, quantum meruit not available where express
contract proven). Unifund CCR Partners v. Gellatly (Tex.App.- Houston [1st Dist.] July 3, 2008)(Nuchia)
Because we conclude American Express established its breach-of-contract claim, we need not address
appellant's challenge to summary judgment on American Express's alternative quantum meruit theory. See
Vortt Exploration Co. v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 787 S.W.2d 942, 944 (Tex. 1990) (recognizing that generally
party may recover in quantum meruit only when there is no express contract covering the services or
materials furnished). Ghia v. AMEX (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Oct. 11, 2007)(Seymore)
(summary judgment for American Express, original creditor, in credit card debt suit affirmed)