Anderson, a farmer, orally agreed to buy a used tractor from the Copeland Equipment Company for $$475.$ Copeland delivered the tractor to Anderson, who used it for $11$ days. During this period, Anderson could not borrow enough funds to cover the purchase price. Anderson therefore returned the tractor to Copeland. Both parties agreed that their sales contract was canceled when the tractor was returned. However, Copeland later claimed that under the doctrine of quasi$-$contract, Anderson was required to pay for the $11-$day use of the tractor. Do you agree with Copeland? Explain your answer. $[$See Anderson v$.$ Copeland, $378$ P$\mathrm{.}2$d $1006($OK$).]$