Reeves v. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co.

Today's decision departs significantly from our analysis in Reeves v. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. (Reeves I)1 of the remedy for breach of an implied-in-fact contract. I disagree with today's plurality opinion because I believe that the trial court erred by failing to limit the jury's consideration of damages to the value of the services Reeves provided in developing and disclosing his unoriginal idea to Alyeska. In my view, the trial court should have instructed the jury that in the absence of an express agreement regarding compensation, the jury could only consider the value of the services…