In Scheerer v. Fisher where Scheerer, a real estate agent, sued Fisher for failing to pay Scheerer for his services in locating property for Fisher, the appeals court held that:
A) there was no contract or basis for payment to Scheerer
B) there was an implied contract and so Scheerer must be paid
C) there was implied contract, but there was no need to pay Scheerer since the original deal fell through
D) there was no contract, but Scheerer should be paid anyway, out of good will
E) none of the other choices are correct

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The appeals court held that there was an implied contract between Scheerer and Fisher, which meant that Scheerer should be paid for his services in locating property for Fisher. Therefore, option B is the correct answer.

In Scheerer V