Opinion
Klingsmith & Russell, P.C., Wyatt Angelo, Gunnison, for plaintiffs-appellees.
Kasic & Carrico, C. Patrick Carrico, Gunnison, for defendant-appellant.
RULAND, Judge.
Plaintiffs commenced suit against their employer, Way Station Restaurant and Lounge, Inc., (Way Station) and defendant Margaret H. Dunlap as president and principal stockholder of Way Station for failure to compensate them according to the terms of their employement. Way Station appeals from a judgment against it in the amount of $7,372.32; we affirm.
The facts are not now disputed. Plaintiff Kathleen Oberosler agreed to perform specific tasks on a part-time basis for the restaurant owned by Way Station, including record keeping, hiring of employees, and acting as a hostess on a part-time basis. When it became apparent that additional employees could not be hired at the wages authorized by Way Station, Kathleen Oberosler with the assistance of plaintiff David Oberosler agreed to undertake additional duties, including waiting on tables, cooking, cleaning, bartending, and transporting coal. As compensation for these additional services, Way Station agreed to transfer to plaintiffs 5% Of its corporate stock and to pay the expenses incurred by the Oberoslers for babysitters. However, Way Station ultimately refused to deliver the stock, or to otherwise compensate plaintiffs.
Following presentation of evidence, the trial court questioned counsel to establish precisely the theory upon which plaintiffs sought recovery. Plaintiffs in effect elected to seek the value of the additional services on the theory of Quantum meruit and thereby abandoned any claim under the express contract. The trial court awarded judgment based on its findings as to the reasonable value of the services rendered and expenses advanced.
In this appeal Way Station states its position as follows:
'Inasmuch as the Way Station's failure to deliver certain securities constituted a breach of its contract with the Oberoslers, the letter were entitled at law to recovery on the theory of Quantun meruit. However, the proper measure of damages was the value of the securities which the Way Station failed to deliver, rather than the reasonable value of the services which the Oberoslers performed.'
We disagree with Way Station's contention as to the applicable measure of damages. The measure of damages in Quantum meruit is the reasonable value of the services rendered by plaintiffs. Smith v. Bliss, 44 Cal.App.2d 171, 112 P.2d 30. See also Grau v. Mitchell, 156 Colo. 111, 397 P.2d 488. The judgment is therefore affirmed.
ENOCH and PIERCE, JJ., concur.