Britton v. Turner
New Hampshire Supreme Court of Judicature
6 N.H. 481 (1834)
Britton (plaintiff) agreed to work for Turner (defendant) for one year for the sum of $120. After nine and a half months, Britton stopped working for Turner, without Turner’s consent. Upon Turner’s refusal to pay for the work completed, Britton sued Turner alleging, inter alia, a claim for quantum meruit. On this basis, Britton claimed that he was entitled to $100 for the labor he had performed. At trial, Turner proved that Britton had agreed to work for one year and voluntarily failed to do so, but Turner presented no evidence of damages he incurred as a result of Britton’s breach. The trial court instructed the jury that Britton was entitled to recover under quantum meruit for the value of the labor that he performed and the jury awarded Britton $95. Turner appealed the trial court’s instructions to the jury.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Parker, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 170,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.