In Hynansky v. 1492 Hospitality Grp., Inc., 2007 WL 2319191 (Del. Super. Ct. 2007) the Delaware Superior Court explained the requirements to recover under quantum meruit. In Hynansky the Court said: "Recovery under a quasi-contract action is the value of the services provided, not the value of the benefit received. In the absence of an express agreement, a plaintiff may be able to recover the reasonable value of the materials or services rendered to a defendant on a quasi-contract theory. To prevail on this theory, Plaintiff must show at trial that he provided services to Defendants and that he performed the services with the expectation that Defendants would pay for them. Plaintiff must also show that the circumstances should have put Defendants on notice that Plaintiff expected to be paid. If Plaintiff makes this showing, he may recover the reasonable value of his services under the restitutionary principle of quantum meruit. The phrase literally means "as much as he deserves," and is the "reasonable worth or value of services rendered for the benefit of another."