Melchior v. New Line Productions, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that California law does not recognize unjust enrichment and restitution as independent causes of action
• holding that there is no cause of action in California for unjust enrichment
• “The phrase ‘unjust enrichment’ does not describe a theory of recovery, but an effect: the result of a failure to make restitution under circumstances where it is equitable to do so.”
• “Unjust enrichment is not a cause of action . . . but rather 21 ‘a general principle, underlying various legal doctrines and remedies.’ It is synonymous with 22 restitution.”
• “The phrase ‘unjust enrichment’ does not describe a theory of recovery, but an effect: the result of a failure to make restitution under circumstances where it is equitable to do so.”
• “[T]here is no 17 cause of action in California for unjust enrichment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).