## Facts

- A high school baseball program sought an indoor batting facility to be built on land owned by a county board of education.
- A construction company built the facility after discussions that included the school’s varsity baseball coach, Michael Brown.
- The school board refused to pay for the completed facility.
- The construction company sued Brown (individually) and various school-related entities, seeking payment under quantum meruit.
- A jury awarded $150,000 and found Brown and certain school entities jointly and severally liable on a quantum meruit theory.
- Brown argued he did not personally contract for the work, received no personal benefit outside his coaching role, and was protected by official immunity as a public employee performing discretionary duties without malice or intent to injure.

## Issues

1. Whether a public school coach may be held personally liable in quantum meruit for construction performed on school property primarily benefiting the school.
2. Whether official immunity bars an individual-capacity quantum meruit claim arising from discretionary acts within the scope of a public employee’s authority absent wilful or wanton conduct, actual malice, or intent to cause injury.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed the Court of Appeals as to Brown’s individual liability.
- The court held the trial court should have granted Brown’s motion for directed verdict on the quantum meruit claim against him individually.
- Even assuming Brown had authority to act on behalf of the school board in dealings that could support an implied promise to pay, official immunity barred imposing individual liability on him for discretionary acts performed within his official role.
- There was no allegation or evidence that Brown acted wilfully, wantonly, with actual malice, or with intent to cause injury.

## Legal Principles

- Quantum meruit implies a promise to pay reasonable value when a person transfers valuable services or property that another accepts.
- Official immunity bars individual-capacity suits against public officials or employees for discretionary acts within the scope of authority unless the official acted wilfully or wantonly, with actual malice, or with actual intent to cause injury.
- Official immunity can apply to quasi-contract claims (including quantum meruit) when the liability theory seeks to impose personal payment responsibility based on discretionary official conduct undertaken for a governmental entity.

## Conclusion

Because Brown’s challenged conduct was discretionary, within the scope of his public employment, and unaccompanied by the level of wrongful intent required to defeat official immunity, he could not be held personally liable in quantum meruit for the value of the school facility.


Brown v. Penland Constr. Co., 285 Ga. 507, 678 S.E.2d 547 (Ga. 2009)