Preview:

REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 87 September Term, 2000 _______________________________

SAMUEL MOGAVERO

V.

LARRY SILVERSTEIN, ET AL.

_______________________________ Salmon, Eyler, Deborah S., Smith, Marvin H. (Ret., Specially Assigned),

JJ. _______________________________ Opinion by Salmon, J.

Filed: January 30, 2002

The first question presented in this appeal is whether the terms of an employment contract, allegedly entered into between the parties, was definite enough to be enforced. We shall hold that the

terms were too indefinite to be enforceable and, accordingly, affirm the trial judge's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants on the breach of contract count (Count I). Another important issue that we must resolve is whether the lower court erred when it granted summary judgment against the plaintiff, Samuel Mogavero, on Count II, in which plaintiff sought damages on the basis of quantum meruit. The answer to that question

depends upon whether plaintiff was required to prove what the defendants gained by the services he rendered or whether the plaintiff needed only to show the value of his services. We shall

hold that the plaintiff must prove what the defendants gained by his services. Here, plaintiff failed to show what defendants gained.

Thus, the court did not err in granting summary judgment as to Count II.

I. The facts set forth in Part I are presented in the light most favorable to appellant, Samuel Mogavero. See Md. Rule 2-501; see

also Jones v. Mid-Atlantic Funding Co., 362 Md. 661, 676 (2001). Appellees, Larry Silverstein ("Silverstein") and Mason Dixon Properties, LLC ("Mason Dixon"), controvert many of those facts.

A.

Background

Samuel Mogavero ("Mr. Mogavero") was a successful general contractor from 1972 to 1985. During that period, he owned a

construction company called Mogavero and Son, which operated in the Baltimore Metropolitan area. age forty-eight. Mr. Mogavero semi-retired in 1985 at

Thereafter, he remained interested in matters Additionally, he devoted a considerable

relating to construction.

portion of his time to management of his real estate and other investments. At all times here relevant, Mr. Mogavero possessed expertise in regard to several subjects, including real estate development, estimating construction costs, and management of construction projects. One of the properties that Mr. Mogavero owned was a former

rag factory located in the Fells Point section of Baltimore City. The rag factory was converted by Mr. Mogavero into an upscale residential complex known as King George House. Silverstein resided at the King George House. and Mr. Mogavero met and became good friends. As a result, he

Over a period of

years, Silverstein sought Mr. Mogavero's advice and guidance concerning the wisdom of making several real estate investments. In October of 1997, Silverstein, on behalf of Mason Dixon, became interested in purchasing a collection of older, mostly vacant buildings, located across the street from King George House. properties were owned by John Raczkowsky and his wife, Reba. Those By

2

coincidence, Mr. Mogavero had once tried to purchase the Raczkowskys' property (hereafter "the property"), but his offer had been rejected. Mr. Mogavero told Silverstein that he suspected that the Raczkowskys would now accept a lower price than their earlier demand. Silverstein asked Mr. Mogavero to set up a meeting with the Raczkowskys to see if a purchase agreement could be reached. Mr.

Mogavero arranged a meeting with the Raczkowskys and Silverstein. This meeting eventually led to Mason Dixon signing an agreement on December 29, 1997, to purchase the Raczkowskys' property. Mason Dixon's intended use of the property was to rehabilitate

and convert the buildings so they could be rented as upscale commercial units. The cost for rehabilitation was anticipated to be The contract granted the purchaser a

roughly three million dollars.

feasibility period, which allowed Mason Dixon to avoid purchasing the property if it decided that its intended use of the property was not economically feasible. B. The Oral Contract

Download Mogavero v. Silverstein.pdf

Maryland Law