About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [i] (July 2016 through April 2017)

handle is hein.ali/relwrstn0064 and id is 1 raw text is: RESTITUTION PART I. THE RIGHT TO RESTITUTION (QUASI CONTRACTS AND KINDRED EQUITABLE RELIEF) CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTORY MATTERS TOPIC 1. UND PRINCIPLES § 1. Unjust Enrichment C.A.D.C.2016. Com. (c) quot. in case quot. in sup. Tenant brought an unjust-enrichment claim, inter alia, against landlord, alleging that landlord illegally collected fees from her for late rent. The district court granted landlord's motion to dismiss. This court reversed and remanded, citing Restatement of Restitution § 1 in holding that tenant adequately pleaded that she conferred a benefit on landlord by giving it a payment and that landlord retained the payment, but a question of fact remained as to whether landlord's retention of the payment was unjust. The court reasoned, in part, that whether the late fee paid by tenant was disproportionate to landlord's reasonably anticipated damages and thus an improper penalty was a factual question that was not properly resolved at the motion-to-dismiss stage. Falconi- Sachs v. LPF Senate Square, LLC, 142 A.3d 550, 556. N.D.Cal.2015. Quot. in sup. In consolidated actions, seller of irritant-filled projectiles used by law- enforcement or military personnel brought a trademark-infringement action against competitor; defendant filed a counterclaim for, among other things, unjust enrichment, alleging that plaintiff s settlement of its claims against certain suppliers caused them to stop working with defendant and harmed defendant's position in the marketplace. This court denied in part plaintiff s motion to strike defendant's unjust-enrichment counterclaim under the state's anti-SLAPP statute, holding that defendant had established at least minimal merit for its claim. The court cited Restatement of Restitution § 1 in support of the proposition that a person who was unjustly enriched at the expense of another was required to make restitution to the other. United Tactical Systems, LLC v. Real Action Paintball, Inc., 143 F.Supp.3d 982, 1023. D.D.C.2016. Com. (c) cit. in case quot. in sup. Former participant in a disability-insurance-benefit program filed a putative class action asserting claims for unjust enrichment against insurer and others, alleging that defendants issued group accident-and-sickness policies without prior approval from the insurance commissioner in violation of a District of Columbia statute. This court granted defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff s unjust-enrichment claim to the extent that it was based on defendants' purported violation of the statute, but denied the motion to the extent that it was based on plaintiff s allegations that, on two occasions, defendants received and retained higher-than-authorized premium payments. The court explained that, under District of Columbia law, unjust enrichment occurred when a plaintiff conferred a benefit on a defendant, the defendant retained the benefit, and the defendant's retention of the benefit was unjust, and that, under the first Restatement of Restitution § 1, the recipient A L m For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most