Diamond\ S\ Development Corporation v. Mercantile Bank

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a claim for unjust enrichment “was precluded by the existence of an express contract between the parties concerning the same subject matter”
• holding “unjust enrichment claim [is] precluded by the existence of an express contract between the parties concerning the same subject matter”
• affirming dismissal of request for imposition of a constructive trust where there was an express contract between the parties governing the subject matter
• “[A] plaintiff cannot pursue a ... claim for unjust enrichment if an express contract exists concerning the same subject matter.”
• “Florida courts have held that a plaintiff cannot pursue a quasi-contract claim for unjust enrichment if an express contract exists concerning the same subject matter.”
• “Florida courts have held that a plaintiff cannot pursue a quasi-contract claim for unjust enrichment if an express contract exists concerning the same subject matter.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).