The answer is good, but just a couple of corrections.
This would be a classical quasi-contractual or restitution remedy case. Dozier is right that he never signed or agreed to a contract with Paschall. The improvements, however, are made with his knowledge. Paschall has grounds to seek reformation citing that his (Dozier's) daughter hired him (Paschall) to perform the work on the residence owned by Dozier and Dozier knew but never tried to intervene. A court could impose a reasonable value of that benefit to avoid either party receiving unjust enrichment (Dozier being the one receiving unjust enrichment here, if he avoids paying Paschall)..
Get Answers For Free
Most questions answered within 1 hours.