Hudson v. Mathers

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that where “an express contract [was] in place between plaintiff and [defendant] that governed” the compensation sought by plaintiff, plaintiff may not recover “under a theory of unjust enrichment”
• affirming dismissal of claim when agency was not licensed under Michigan Occupational Code, despite Georgia choice-of-law clause, where Georgia did not have a substantial relationship to the parties or transaction and the plaintiff was untimely in raising choice-of-law issue
• statutory bar precluded unlicensed personnel agency from bringing breach of contract or unjust enrichment claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).