Also known as: enrich · enriches · enriched · enriching · enrichments · unjust enrichment
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
The receipt of a benefit by one party at the expense of another. Retention of the benefit supports restitution when it would be unjust to allow the recipient to keep the advantage without compensating the provider.
Emmett Egan spent four days reconfiguring Oak Broadband's cell tower equipment after repeated outages. The work restored service to thousands of customers and produced measurable revenue gains for the company. A court orders return of the specific equipment reconfiguration to prevent Oak Broadband from retaining the benefit without compensating Emmett.
Eduardo Enriquez and Echelon Security were both held liable for the same harm to a third party. Eduardo paid the full judgment. A court requires Echelon to indemnify Eduardo because Echelon would otherwise retain the benefit of the discharged liability without contributing its share.
Elliot Edmonds executed a will attempting to leave the marital home to a third party while divorce proceedings were pending. Title to the home was held in tenancy by the entirety. Upon Elliot's death the surviving spouse receives the property by operation of law, and equity refuses to impose a constructive trust absent any showing of wrongful conduct or unjust enrichment.
Esther Eisenberg performed network reconfiguration work that produced concrete economic gains for Equinox Energy. The company later refused payment. A court awards Esther a sum of money measured by the value of the benefit received to prevent the company from retaining that value without compensation.
Eric Espinoza voluntarily repaired equipment for Empire Logistics without any prior request for payment. Empire later promised compensation in recognition of the work performed. The promise is not binding to the extent Eric conferred the benefit as a gift, leaving Empire without unjust enrichment.
Edith Eberhardt performed a human cannonball act at a county fair. A television station broadcast the entire performance without consent. The broadcast allowed viewers to see the act without paying admission, depriving Edith of the economic value of exclusive control over publicity for her performance.
Hugo Zacchini performs a "human cannonball" act in which he is shot from a cannon into a net some 200 feet away, with each performance occupying some 15 seconds. In August and September 1972, Zacchini was engaged to perform his act on a regular basis at the Geauga County Fair in Burton, Ohio. He performed in a fenced area, surrounded by grandstands, at the fair grounds, and members of the public attending the fair were not charged a separate admission fee to observe his act. On August 30, a freelance reporter for Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co., the operator of a television broadcasting station, attended the fair carrying a small movie camera. Zacchini noticed the reporter and asked him not to film the performance, and the reporter did not do so on that day. On the instructions of the producer of the station's daily newscast, the reporter returned the following day and videotaped the entire act. This film clip, approximately 15 seconds in length, was shown on the 11 o'clock news program that night, together with favorable commentary. Zacchini then brought this action for damages against Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co. He alleged that the station showed and commercialized the film of his act without his consent. Such conduct was an unlawful appropriation of his professional property. The trial court granted summary judgment for the broadcaster. The Court of Appeals of Ohio reversed. The Supreme Court of Ohio gave judgment for the broadcaster. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
View caseA party who receives a measurable economic benefit at another's expense must make restitution when retention would be unjust. Courts measure recovery by the value of the benefit conferred rather than any promise or loss suffered by the provider.
Supporting sources
A history of performing similar work without payment may indicate the later benefit was conferred as a gift. If the recipient was not unjustly enriched, any subsequent promise of compensation is not binding under the rule that treats gratuitous benefits as outside the scope of unjust enrichment.
Supporting sources
When one tortfeasor discharges a shared liability, indemnity is available if the other would otherwise retain the benefit of that discharge without contributing its share. The rule prevents one party from being unjustly enriched at the expense of the paying tortfeasor.
Supporting sources
A will cannot dispose of property held in tenancy by the entirety or joint tenancy with right of survivorship. Equity will not impose a constructive trust to redirect title to a third party named in the will absent wrongful conduct or unjust enrichment by the surviving spouse.
Supporting sources
…one's identity that is central to any concept of liberty" cannot truly be exercised in a vacuum; we all depend on the "emotional enrichment from close ties with others." Ibid. Only the most willful blindness could obscure the fact that sexual intimacy is "a sensitive, key relationship of human existence, central to family…