Zarrella v. Pacific Life Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that unjust enrichment may be pled if one or more parties dispute the existence of an express contract
• “No cause of action in unjust enrichment can exist where the parties’ relationship is governed by an express contract.”
• “No cause of action in unjust enrichment can exist where the parties’ relationship is governed by an express contract.”
• “Pacific Life is an insurance company, so FDUTPA does not apply to claims against Pacific Life. Accordingly, because Plaintiffs’ allegations cannot support this claim as a matter of law, the Court will dismiss Plaintiffs’ FDUTPA claim with prejudice.”
• “Plaintiffs cannot use negligence per se to create a private cause of action for alleged violations of [Fla. Stat.] § 626.9541(l)(a)l, and (b)4 because the legislature has not demonstrated an intent to create a private cause of action under these sections.”
• “Plaintiffs cannot use negligence per se to create a private cause of action for alleged violations of § 626.9541(1)(a) 1 and (b) 4 because the legislature has not demonstrated an intent to create a private cause of action under these sections.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).