Gee v. Eberle

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[t]he doctrine of unjust enrichment is clearly ‘inapplicable when the relationship between the parties is founded on a written agreement or express contract’ ”
• A plaintiff “has a right to recover on the promise … The existence of that right, however, precludes a claim of unjust enrichment”
• subcontractors could only partially recover based on the amount of project price that owner failed to pay
• “[I]f one party is given discretion in determining whether the condition in fact has occurred that party must use good faith in making that determination.”
• “[T]he essence of the doctrine of unjust enrichment is that there is no direct relationship between the parties.”
• lender found liable based upon misrepresentations made to subcontractors

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).