Kuroda v. SPJS Holdings, L.L.C.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that parties may claim unjust enrichment when there is doubt about whether a contract exists or is enforceable
• holding that in any event, an implied covenant claim cannot be “invoked to override the express terms of [a] contract.”
• holding that in any event, an implied covenant claim cannot be “invoked to override the express terms of [a] contract.”
• holding that potential future liability for income taxes that have not been incurred is “speculative harm”
• ruling that “the complaint fails to state a claim for conversion because the claim is duplicative of Kuroda’s breach of contract claim”
• noting that the plaintiffs \cannot use a claim for unjust enrichment to extend the obligations of a contract to [defendants] who are not parties to the contract.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).