Jogani v. Superior Court

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that at the time of the adoption of the California Constitution in 1850 quantum meruit was an action at law
• “[U]njust enrichment is not a cause of action[;] [r]ather it is a general principle underlying various doctrines and remedies[.]”
• “[U]njust enrichment is not a cause of action. Rather, it is a general principle underlying various doctrines and remedies, including quasi-contract.”
• “[W]e conclude that quantum meruit was recognized as a form of the common law writ of assumpsit . . . and that the parties to a quantum meruit action consequently have a right to a jury trial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).