Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 8 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Alternatives Unlimited, Inc. v. New Baltimore City Board of School Commissioners.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alternatives Unlimited, Inc. v. New Baltimore City Board of School Commissioners Anchor | green | “the restitutionary remedies and unjust enrichment are simply flip sides of the same coin.” | 5 |
| 2 | Hill v. Cross Country Settlements, LLC | green | “the doctrine of unjust enrichment is applicable where 'the defendant, upon the circumstances of the case, is obliged by the ties of natural justice and equity to refund the money,' and gives rise to the policy of restitution as a remedy.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.