Bodmer v. Turnage

In Bodmer v. Turnage, 105 Cal. App. 2d 475, 233 P.2d 157 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1951), the defendant/owner purchased lots in a desert resort development. Bodmer, 233 P.2d at 158. The owner contracted with the plaintiff/architect to conduct preliminary studies, working drawings and specifications for the owner's proposed development of the lots. Id. The contract provided that the architect would be compensated 6% of the value of the work as it progressed, but if the work designed by the architect was suspended or abandoned, the architect would be paid for his services. Id. The architect prepared a total of five sets of studies and plans, each incorporating changes by the owner, with the final one being approved by the owner. Id. The construction on the project was eventually abandoned, and the architect sued the owner for the agreed contracted-upon price for the preliminary studies and for additional sums representing the reasonable value of the work done in preparing the plans and specifications. Id. The trial court found in favor of the architect. Id. On appeal, the owner argued that the architect could not recover because quantum meruit required a showing of a benefit to the owner, and the owner "received no benefit from the plaintiff's services since the plans prepared were not as such as he could use." Id. The defendant contended that he informed the architect that he could only build as many structures as within his budget of $ 50,000.00 to $ 60,000.00. Id. at 159. The appellate court found that the evidence instead supported the trial court's finding that the owner ordered plans for the whole project, and not simply parts which would fall within the budget. Id. The appellate court further held that the owner "derived the benefit he had in mind, and the fact that he later decided not to use the plans he had ordered in no way indicates an absence of benefit, within the meaning of the quantum meruit rule." Id.