Industrial Lift Truck Service Corp. v. Mitsubishi International Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• dismissing an unjust enrichment claim because the “[plaintiffs attempt here to bring a quasi-contract action is nothing more than an attempt to unilaterally amend the agreement in a manner prohibited by the agreement”
• the express contract barred the claim in quasi-contract, even though the plaintiff rendered additional services beyond those provided in the contract
• as a general rule no quasi-contractual claim can arise when a contract exists between the parties concerning the same subject matter on which the quasi-contractual claim rests
• as a general rule no quasi-contractual claim can arise when a contract exists between the parties concerning the same subject matter on which the quasi-contractual claim rests
• “Quasi- contract is not a means for shifting a risk one has assumed under contract.”
• the express contract barred the claim in quasi-contract, even though the plaintiff rendered additional services beyond those provided in the contract

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).