- 5 - on quantum meruit for the portion of his claim relating to decedent's real estate. During jury deliberations, David and the executors reached an agreement, called a structured settlement, the terms of which depended in part on the jury verdict. The jury determined that David and decedent had entered into a binding contract under which decedent agreed to give David one- third of her estate and in return David agreed to provide personal and financial services to decedent. The jury also determined the value of David's services performed under the contract to be worth $75,000 (without interest). The jury found sufficient consideration to support the oral contract at the time of the alleged oral agreement. The jury's finding that the value of David's services was $75,000 did not limit David's recovery with respect to decedent's personal property, but would have been used as a basis to determine David's ultimate recovery with respect to the real estate. As a result of the jury's verdict in favor of David, he would have, but for the settlement agreement, received approximately $1.5 million plus $3,750 (the quantum meruit portion relating to decedent's real estate). Because the jury returned a verdict in favor of David, the structured settlement provided that David was entitled to receive $400,000 in full satisfaction of his claim against decedent's estate for services provided to decedentPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011