Britt A. Shaw, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Hyatt International Corporation

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• applying Illinois law and affirming dismissal of the plaintiffs unjust enrichment claim because it rested on the breach of- an express contract.
• affirming dismissal of ICFA claim based upon a “breach of contract” where a “contractual promise . . . was unfulfilled”
• affirming the district court’s finding that the plaintiff’s claim was one for breach of contract and dismissing plaintiff’s claim under the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act despite the plaintiff’s failure to allege a breach of contract claim
• “[The plaintiff] fails to present a claim for unjust enrichment, because that is unavailable where the claim rests on the breach of an express contract.”
• claim for unjust enrichment “is unavailable where the claim rests on the breach of an express contract”
• “Shaw fails to present a claim for unjust enrichment, because that is unavailable where the claim rests on the breach of an express contract.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).