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

Case Citations [1] (July 2021 - April 2022)

handle is hein.ali/relwrstn0074 and id is 1 raw text is: RESTITUTION Generally Md.Spec.App.2021. Cit generally in treatise cit. in disc. Landlord brought, among other things, a claim for unjust enrichment against illegal occupants of premises, alleging that tenant improperly permitted defendants to make use of the premises without paying rent to plaintiff. The trial court entered judgment for defendants. This court affirmed, holding that plaintiff did not have a claim for unjust enrichment against defendants, because the fact that tenant conferred a benefit onto defendants did not necessarily mean that defendants' enrichment was unjust. The court noted that the Restatement of Restitution codified the field of unjust-enrichment law from a variety of specific common-law rules supporting the general principle that unjust enrichment had to be disgorged. Clark Office Building, LLC v. MCM Capital Partners, LLLP, 245 A.3d 186, 190. PART I. THE RIGHT TO RESTITUTION (QUASI CONTRACTS AND KINDRED EQUITABLE RELIEF) CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTORY MATTERS TOPIC 1. UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES § 1. Unjust Enrichment S.D.N.Y.2021. Cit. in case cit. in sup. Kazakhstan city and Kazakhstan bank sued owner of limited- liability company, associate, and related entities, alleging, inter alia, that defendants were unjustly enriched when they enacted a money-laundering scheme using U.S. and international entities to assist former Kazakhstan official's embezzlement of plaintiffs' funds. This court denied in part defendants' motion to dismiss, holding that plaintiffs stated a claim for unjust enrichment. Citing Restatement of Restitution § 1, the court noted that defendants' conduct imposed a restitutionary obligation on them, because they received and benefitted from plaintiffs' funds, with the knowledge that it was wrongfully obtained, and under circumstances indicating that the principles of equity and good conscience should bar defendants from retaining the funds. City of Almaty v. Sater, 503 F.Supp.3d 51, 58-59. E.D.Va.2020. Com. (b) quot. in sup. Consumers filed a putative nationwide class action against credit- card company, following a data breach in which consumers' confidential personal information was stolen from servers maintained by company. This court denied company's motion to dismiss consumers' claim for unjust enrichment, holding that, while there was no dispute that consumers had express contracts that governed their relationship with company, a question of fact remained as to whether the contracts defined company's obligations with respect to protecting consumers' information. The court concluded that consumers plausibly alleged that, if their express contractual relationship did not govern their rights with respect to the protection of their information, they were potentially entitled to recover COPYRIGHT ©2022 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved AILJ Printed in the United States of America 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