A tenant improves a cabin and the contractor is unpaid for $10,000 worth of work. The tenant vacates three months early. What action is proper to recover the value of the improvements?

• A. An action for damages under contract.
• B. A claim for punitive damages against the landlord.
• C. An action in quasi-contract for the benefit conferred on the landlord.
• D. A claim for breach of warranty.

Answer: (C)

The key idea is restitution for unjust enrichment. If someone improves another’s property with that owner’s permission and the owner benefits from the work, but there’s no contract requiring the owner to pay, the law allows a quasi‑contract (an implied-in-law contract) to recover the value of the improvements.

Here, the contractor’s work benefits the cabin’s owner (the landlord). There’s no payment from the landlord, and there isn’t a contract with the landlord to pay for those improvements. So the contractor can seek the value of the improvements from the landlord under a quasi‑contract theory to prevent the landlord from being unjustly enriched.

Not a contract damages claim because it targets the landlord without a contract obligating them to pay. Punitive damages aren’t appropriate here since there’s no tortious or malicious conduct to punish. Breach of warranty doesn’t fit the issue, which is recovery of the value of improvements, not a defect or guaranteed quality.