## Facts

- David Chase created, wrote, directed, and produced *The Sopranos* and was developing a “mob-boss-in-therapy” television project when he met Robert Baer, a former New Jersey prosecutor.
- Baer suggested Chase base the series on the northern New Jersey mob, apparently not knowing Chase had previously worked on similar mob-related stories.
- Fox agreed to fund a pilot after Chase pitched the project.
- Chase offered to pay Baer up front for assistance, but Baer asked instead to be paid the “true value” of his services if the show succeeded; no written agreement was made.
- Chase traveled to New Jersey for about three days. During that trip, Baer arranged meetings with people Baer believed could supply useful information and stories, including a homicide detective and an organized-crime expert.
- The detective drove Baer and Chase to northern New Jersey landmarks and locations associated with organized crime; Baer also helped connect Chase with other sources, including an Italian restaurant waiter known for telling good stories.
- Baer answered Chase’s questions about organized crime, performed research, and later provided comments on a draft pilot script, though his script comments were provided roughly 14 months after he received the draft.
- *The Sopranos* became highly successful, but Chase did not pay Baer.
- Baer sued Chase and DC Enterprises, Inc. asserting multiple claims seeking compensation connected to the show.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Chase on Baer’s contract-based and idea-based theories, reasoning there was no enforceable written contract and that the information/ideas Baer provided were either in the public domain or came from other people Baer introduced to Chase.
- On appeal, the Third Circuit reinstated only a quasi-contract/unjust enrichment claim (restitution for benefits conferred without compensation) and remanded for further proceedings on that limited theory.
- On remand, Chase moved to limit discovery and damages on the remaining quasi-contract claim to the reasonable value of Baer’s services (such as location scouting, research, and consulting), and to bar any valuation of alleged “ideas” or story contributions.
- Baer argued he should be able to pursue recovery for a unique combination of public information that he claimed produced something new for Chase and benefited the project.

## Issues

1. Whether, on Baer’s remaining quasi-contract claim, damages may include the value of alleged ideas or creative/story contributions when prior rulings treated those ideas as non-novel, public, or supplied by third parties.
2. Whether Baer’s recovery in quasi-contract is limited to the reasonable value of his concrete services (e.g., arranging meetings, providing access to sources, showing locations, answering questions, and research).
3. Whether discovery and expert evidence may address the value of alleged ideas, or must be confined to valuing compensable services.

## Decision

- The court granted defendants’ motion to limit damages and related discovery.
- The court held Baer’s quasi-contract claim could proceed only as to the reasonable value of services he performed that conferred a benefit on Chase (including work fairly characterized as location scout, researcher, and consultant).
- The court ruled Baer could not recover in quasi-contract for the ideas themselves or for the “service” of providing, conveying, developing, or shaping those ideas.
- Because it was law of the case that the relevant ideas were not novel, were in the public domain, or were not Baer’s (having come from others), the court barred discovery, expert work, and trial proof aimed at valuing those ideas.
- The court permitted discovery and proof directed to the value of Baer’s compensable services.

## Legal Principles

- Quasi-contract (unjust enrichment/restitution) permits recovery of the reasonable value of benefits conferred and accepted when compensation is reasonably expected and equity requires payment.
- Under New Jersey law, idea-based recovery in quasi-contract requires objective novelty; public-domain material or facts supplied by third parties generally do not qualify.
- New Jersey does not permit idea-based quasi-contract recovery on a “novel to the defendant” theory when the idea is otherwise non-novel or publicly available.
- When an appellate decision and prior rulings establish that asserted ideas are non-novel, public, or not the plaintiff’s, the law-of-the-case doctrine limits what may be pursued on remand, including the scope of damages and discovery.
- Even when idea valuation is barred, a plaintiff may still seek restitution for discrete services (such as research, introductions, and location assistance) that provided a measurable benefit.

## Conclusion

Baer v. Chase (2007 WL 1237850) limits Baer’s remanded quasi-contract claim to restitution for the reasonable value of his concrete services—such as arranging meetings, showing locations, answering questions, and research—while barring damages, discovery, and evidence aimed at valuing any alleged ideas or story contributions, because prior rulings established those ideas were non-novel, public, or not Baer’s.


Baer v. Chase, 2007 WL 1237850 (2007)