Clapp v. Goffstown School District

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that “[u]njust enrichment may be available to contracting parties where the contract was breached, rescinded, or otherwise made invalid”
• noting that “[u]njust enrichment may be available to contracting parties where the contract was breached, rescinded, or otherwise made invalid, or where the benefit received was outside the scope of the contract”
• no unjust enrichment where defendant retained funds it had otherwise voted to spend because express contract governed employee's recovery
• “Unjust enrichment may be available to contracting parties where the contract was breached, rescinded, or otherwise made invalid, or where the benefit received was outside the scope of the contract.”
• “Unjust enrichment may be available to contracting parties where the contract was breached, rescinded, or otherwise made invalid, or where the benefit received was outside the scope of the contract.”
• “It is a well-established principle that the court ordinarily cannot allow recovery under a theory of unjust enrichment where there is a valid, express contract covering the subject matter at hand.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).