Doctrine Of Unjust Enrichment

The Law Office of Craig Seldin understand contract law. They are one of the best law firms in Texas for contract law cases and have one of the best track records in that area. One of the parts of contract law that is often over looked is when there is no official contract in place and there is unjust enrichment going to one of the parties. This is something that happens all too often, and burdens one of the parties. Below are two examples given to us by Craig Seldin, the lead attorney at The Law Offices of Craig Seldin. They outline the definition and give some examples of unjust enrichment.

The doctrine of unjust enrichment applies the principles of restitution to disputes that are not governed by a contract between the parties. Unjust enrichment characterizes the result of a failure to make restitution of benefits either wrongfully or passively received under circumstances that give rise to an implied or quasi-contractual obligation to repay. The doctrine applies the principles of restitution to disputes where there is no actual contract, based on the equitable principle that one who receives benefits that would be unjust for him or her to retain ought to make restitution. Casstevens v. Smith, 269 S.W.3d 222, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 8038 (Tex. App. Texarkana 2008)

Unjust enrichment may take the form of the unjust retention of a benefit to the detriment of another person or the unlawful retention of money or of other personal property belonging to another person. [Tri-State Chems., Inc. v. Western Organics, Inc., 83 S.W.3d 189, 199 (Tex. App.--Amarillo 2002, pet. denied) The profit must be "unjust" under principles of equity. Zapata Corp. v. Zapata Gulf Marine Corp., 986 S.W.2d 785, 788 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, no pet.) Quasi contractual obligations are imposed by the courts for the purpose of bringing about a just result without reference to the intention of the parties. Thus, unjust enrichment does not result from a contract but is an obligation imposed by law to do justice even though it is clear that no promise was ever made or intended [see Fortune Production Co. v. Conoco, Inc., 52 S.W.3d 671, 683-684 (Tex. 2000) ]; Calamari et al., THE LAW OF CONTRACTS, 1-12 (3d ed. 1987) Casstevens v. Smith, 269 S.W.3d 222, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 8038 (Tex. App. Texarkana 2008)

You have read the best review article categorized by accident attorney and the title Doctrine Of Unjust Enrichment. You can bookmark or spread this post by using this URL http://duiattorney-info.blogspot.com/2012/05/doctrine-of-unjust-enrichment.html. Thank You!