Can I Get Paid for Custom Work that was Rejected as Unsatisfactory?

Full question:

I am a costume designer that is contracted by dance studios for custom costuming. I was recently contracted for 17 costumes. Because I've worked for her previously and have a good reputation as a designer, she gave me creative freedom to create the costumes with only general directions of the basic 'look'. The details were completely up to me as she said she trusted my judgement. This was an oral contract and she gave no written instructions, photos, drawings, etc of what to make. She gave a $35.00 deposit per dancer. I clarified the details of the order in email. I then did a mock up of one costume and sent photos which was approved with minor changes which I made. I then made the 17 custom costumes, each made to the specific measurements of each dancer. I delivered them, including 17 head pieces as requested. (the instructions were, make something for their heads) with a bill for $127.00 a piece including the sales tax. I received a phone call a few days later that they didn't like the length of the bottoms or the shape of the tuxedo tails and a couple of other complaints, none of them quality or fit issues, just creative subjectivity and I needed to do them over. I refused as I do not have another 100 hours in my schedule and I delivered them as approved in the photo! My offer was they can keep all the work I did on the tops and the hats for the $35.00 deposit and give the bottoms back to me (although they are custom and cannot be resold) or they can pay full price and keep the bottoms. I thought this was more than fair to pay me for all my labor. They are going to take the amount of the deposit I am refusing to return and deduct it from the amount they owe me on another job. Do I have any legal recourse to be paid for my labor and can I actually sue in small claims for the total amount. I delivered a quality product which was approved by photo in email. They just changed their minds!

• Category: Contracts
• Subcategory: Breach of Contract
• Date: 04/07/2025
• State: Florida

Answer:

A legal action for breach of contract arises when at least one party's performance does not live up to the terms of the contract and causes the other party to suffer economic damage or other types of measurable injury. A lawsuit for breach of contract is a civil action and the remedies awarded are designed to place the injured party in the position they would be in if not for the breach. Remedies for contractual breaches are not designed to punish the breaching party. The five basic remedies for breach of contract include the following: money damages, restitution, rescission, reformation, and specific performance. A money damage award includes a sum of money that is given as compensation for financial losses caused by a breach of contract. Parties injured by a breach are entitled to the benefit of the bargain they entered, or the net gain that would have accrued but for the breach. The type of breach governs the extent of damages that may be recovered.

It will be a matter of subjective determination for the court, based on all the facts and evidence involved, whether or not there was a breach of contract and whether the photos were approved or not. Oral contracts present evidentiary problems, and often become a matter of one person's word against the other's. You may submit writings, such as email, and photos to prove acceptance was made. It is preferable to have the terms and details of conditional acceptance and approval in writing. Please see the links to the forms below.

Restitution is a remedy designed to restore the injured party to the position occupied prior to the formation of the contract. Parties seeking restitution may not request to be compensated for lost profits or other earnings caused by a breach. Instead, restitution aims at returning to the plaintiff any money or property given to the defendant under the contract. Plaintiffs typically seek restitution when contracts they have entered are voided by courts due to a defendant's incompetence or incapacity.

Rescission is the name for the remedy that terminates the contractual duties of both parties, while reformation is the name for the remedy that allows courts to change the substance of a contract to correct inequities that were suffered. In order to have a rescission, both parties to the contract must be placed in the position they occupied before the contract was made. Courts have held that a party may rescind a contract for fraud, incapacity, duress, undue influence, material breach in performance of a promise, or mistake, among other grounds.

Specific performance is an equitable remedy that compels one party to perform, as nearly as practicable, his or her duties specified by the contract. Specific performance is available only when money damages are inadequate to compensate the plaintiff for the breach.

Promissory estoppel is a term used in contract law that applies where, although there may not otherwise be an enforceable contract, because one party has relied on the promise of the other, it would be unfair not to enforce the agreement. Promissory estoppel arises from a promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or forebearance of a definite and substantial character on the part of the promisee and which does induce such action or forebearance in binding if injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise. Detrimental reliance is a term commonly used to force another to perform their obligations under a contract, using the theory of promissory estoppel. Promissory estoppel may apply when a promise was made; reliance on the promise was reasonable or foreseeable; there was actual and reasonable reliance on the promise; the reliance was detrimental; and injustice can only be prevented by enforcing the promise. Detrimental reliance must be shown to involve reliance that is reasonable, which is a determination made on an individual case-by-case basis, taking all factors into consideration. Detrimental means that some type of harm is suffered.

Reasonable reliance is usually referred to as a theory of recovery in contract law. It was what a prudent person might believe and act upon based on something told by another. Sometimes a person acts in reliance on the promise of a profit or other benefit, only to learn that the statements or promises were either incorrect or were exaggerated. The one who acted to their detriment in reasonable reliance may recover damages for the costs of his/her actions or demand performance. Reasonable reliance connotes the use of the standard of an ordinary and average person.