Which statement best distinguishes an implied contract from a quasi-contract?

• A. Implied contract is written; quasi contract is oral
• B. Implied contract is inferred from actions; quasi contract is a court-imposed remedy to prevent unjust enrichment
• C. Implied contract requires consideration; quasi contract does not
• D. Implied contract is invalid; quasi contract is valid

Answer: (B)

The main distinction is how the obligation arises. An implied contract is created by the parties’ conduct, showing they intend an agreement through their actions; the terms are inferred from what they do rather than from a written or spoken promise. A quasi-contract, on the other hand, isn’t based on any agreement at all—it’s a court-imposed remedy to prevent unjust enrichment when no contract exists. For example, if someone provides a service and the other party benefits, a court may require payment of a reasonable value to avoid unfairness, even though there was no contract.

That’s why this statement best captures the difference: implied contracts are inferred from actions, while a quasi-contract is a judicial remedy to prevent unjust enrichment. The other options don’t align with this core distinction.