Skip to main content
· 7/12/2011

Lee v. Shim

Citations

  • 713 S.E.2d 906
  • 310 Ga. App. 725
  • 2011 Fulton County D. Rep. 2357
  • 2011 Ga. App. LEXIS 647

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that party could not recover damages under both a binding contract and a theory of unjust enrichment because “plaintiffs are barred from a double recovery of damages”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Adams, Barnes, Blackwell

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.