Contracts/Implication-in-fact: Difference between revisions
en>Fvasconcellos m (wikify, MoS:T) |
en>Sharik (Corrected case reference — this one (261 U.S. 592) is actually much more directly relevant. (It's also the one cited by the reference)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
In [[United States law]], an '''implied-in-fact contract''' (a form of '''implied contract''') is a contract agreed by non-verbal conduct, rather than by explicit words. The {{scotus link}} defined this in its decision ''Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. v. United States'', 261 U.S. | In [[United States law]], an '''implied-in-fact contract''' (a form of '''implied contract''') is a contract agreed by non-verbal conduct, rather than by explicit words. The {{scotus link}} defined this in its decision ''Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. v. United States'', 261 U.S. 592 ([[1923]]).<ref>[http://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/RNimmer/contracts/supp5.pdf Implied in fact contract definition noted from US Supreme Court decision]</ref> Such contracts are formed when one party accepts something of value knowing that the other party expects compensation. For example by visiting a doctor, a patient agrees to pay a fair price for the service. If he refuses to pay after being examined, he has breached a contract implied in fact. | ||
Generally, an implied contract has the same legal force as an express contract. However, it may be more difficult to prove the existence and terms of an implied contract should a dispute arise. In some jurisdictions, contracts involving [[real estate]] may not be created on an implied-in-fact basis. | Generally, an implied contract has the same legal force as an express contract. However, it may be more difficult to prove the existence and terms of an implied contract should a dispute arise. In some jurisdictions, contracts involving [[real estate]] may not be created on an implied-in-fact basis. | ||
Revision as of 19:28, November 29, 2007
In United States law, an implied-in-fact contract (a form of implied contract) is a contract agreed by non-verbal conduct, rather than by explicit words. The Template:Scotus link defined this in its decision Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. v. United States, 261 U.S. 592 (1923).[1] Such contracts are formed when one party accepts something of value knowing that the other party expects compensation. For example by visiting a doctor, a patient agrees to pay a fair price for the service. If he refuses to pay after being examined, he has breached a contract implied in fact.
Generally, an implied contract has the same legal force as an express contract. However, it may be more difficult to prove the existence and terms of an implied contract should a dispute arise. In some jurisdictions, contracts involving real estate may not be created on an implied-in-fact basis.
