Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Schumacher v. Schumacher, 627 N.W.2d 725.

62 citing documents.

Moline Machinery, LLC, et al v. City of Duluth Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Moline Machinery, LLC, et al v. City of Duluth Minn. Ct. App. 2025
allows a plaintiff to recover a benefit conferred upon a defendant when retention of the benefit is not legally justifiable.” (quotation omitted)); “([T]o establish a claim for unjust enrichment, the claimant must show that another party knowingly received something of value to which he was not entitled, and that the circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that person to retain the benefit.”).
Great North Capital Consultants, Inc. v. Maciek G. Kaminski, et al., Kylie E. Kaminski Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Robert Montague, et al v. Elk River Chrysler, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Because count I “merely recites the generic elements of fraud, without alleging particular misrepresentations or omissions,” we conclude that it does not meet the heightened pleading requirement under rule 9.02 see Angeles, d at 422.
David Carl Hepfl v. Jodine Patrice Meadowcroft 9 N.W.3d 567 Minn. 2024
David Carl Hepfl v. Jodine Patrice Meadowcroft 9 N.W.3d 567 Minn. 2024
21, 2023) ( and Park-Lake Car Wash, ).
Metropolitan Transportation Network, Inc., et al v. Collaborative Student Transportation of Minnesota, LLC, et al 6 N.W.3d 771 Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Metropolitan Transportation Network, Inc., et al v. Collaborative Student Transportation of Minnesota, LLC, et al 6 N.W.3d 771 Minn. Ct. App. 2024
21 To succeed on a claim of unjust enrichment, the evidence must show that respondents “knowingly received something of value to which [they were] not entitled, and that the circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that [entity] to retain the benefit.”
Casey Michael Dynan v. Thrivent Financial for Lutherans Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Unjust enrichment “In order to establish a claim for unjust enrichment, the claimant must show that another party knowingly received something of value to which he was not entitled, and that the circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that person to retain the benefit.”
David Carl Hepfl v. Jodine Patrice Meadowcroft Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Scott Lee Neiman, et al., Chuck Otremba v. Cela Sandin, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“[T]o establish a claim for unjust enrichment, the claimant must show that another party knowingly received something of value to which [they were] not entitled, and that the circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that person to retain the benefit.”
Eric Aaron v. Zachary Aaron, et al., Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Minnesota courts have extended unjust enrichment to apply when a defendant’s retention of a benefit is “morally wrong.”
The Townhomes of Raspberry Ridge Homeowners Association, Inc. v. Charles Stuurop Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Signature Select Contracting, et … Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Minnesota courts have extended unjust enrichment to apply if a defendant ’s retention of a benefit is “morally wrong.”
Paul Herlache v. Amy Rucks Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Minnesota courts have extended unjust enrichment to apply if a defendant’s retention of a benefit is “morally wrong.”
GGG, Incorporation v. Jon T. Samuelson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Theresa K. Williams, Personal Representative of the Estate of Kristen Nicole Kuether v. William M. Kuether Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See Schumacher v. Schumacher , (“In order to establish a claim for unjust enrichment, the claimant must show that another party knowingly received something of value to which he was not entitled, and that the circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that person to retain the benefit.”).
Vilnis Neilands v. Elizabeth Perry Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“In order to establish a claim for unjust enrichment, the claimant must show that another party knowingly received something of value to which he was not entitled, and that the circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that person to retain the be nefit.”
In re the Marriage of: Thomas W. Krabbenhoft v. Norma A. Krabbenhoft, n/k/a Norma A. Flores Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“In order to establish a claim for unjust enrichment, the claimant must show that another party knowingly received something of value to which he was not entitled, and that the circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that person to retain the benefit.” Schumacher v. Schumacher
In re the Estate of: Ronald F. Bunde, Deceased Minn. Ct. App. 2020
-30 (Minn. App. 2001) (quotations and citations omitted).
Pohocogo, LLC v. Paul Cassidy, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Shamrock Sod & Landscaping, Inc., et al v. Security State Bank of Fergus Falls, John Leonard Blume, Paul … Minn. Ct. App. 2019
33 City Center Holding LLC v. Rosa Mexicano Minneapolis, LLC, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2019
for the proposition that it is improper to dismiss an unjust enrichment claim on a motion for judgment on the pleadin gs.
North Country Tire and Auto, Inc., et al v. David Leonard Anderson, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“In order to establish a claim for unjust enrichment, the claimant must show that another party knowingly received something of value to which he was not entitled, and that the circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that person to retain the benefit .”
Production Stamping, Inc. v. Wurm Partnership, LLP Minn. Ct. App. 2018
A party may establish an unjust-enrichm ent claim by showing that another party “knowingly received something of value to which [the party] was not entitled, and that the circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that [par ty] to retain the benefit.” Schumacher v. Schumacher
Manor Warehouse & Delivery, Inc. v. Tracy Gratton, et al. and third party plaintiffs, vs. Gail Bendt, third … Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In re the Estate of: Donald H. Richter, deceased Gerald Donald Richter v. Larry A. Richter, Trustee of … Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Ann Marie Hall v. Carrie Reynolds Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Appellant next argues that the district court erred in citing Schumacher v. Schumacher, for the proposition that unjust enrichment requires a showing that “a party was unjustly enriched in the sense that the term unjustly could mean illegally or unlawful.” (quotation omitted).
KLC Financial, Inc. v. Plymouth Harvest Grill, LLC, et al., Aspen Showroom, Inc., et al Minn. Ct. App. 2017
at 196, or “morally wrong,”
Asset Marketing Services, LLC v. Cody Hoskins, Legacy, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“In order to establish a claim for unjust enrich ment, the claimant must show that another party knowingly received something of value to which he was not entitled, and that the circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that person to retain the benefit.”
Vene Lor, as conservator and natural mother of Ricky Yang, and Vene Lor, individually v. Michael Lee Hewitt, … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
A claim for “unjust enrichment does not lie simply because one party benefits from the efforts of others; instead, it must be shown that a party was unjustly enriched in the sense that the term ‘unjustly’ could mean illegally or unlawfully” or in the sense that the “conduct in retaining the benefit [was] morally wrong.” (quotation omitted).
Allen Battle v. Auto Sales 1, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Allen Battle v. Auto Sales 1, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Estate of Clara Mae Murphy, Deceased Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Estate of Clara Mae Murphy, Deceased Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Likewise, to obtain relief under the equitable theory of unjust enrichment, a claimant must not only demonstrate that “another party knowingly received something of value to which he was not entitled,” but also that the “circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that person to retain the benefit.”
Reichel Investments, L.P. v. Craig A. Reichel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Reichel Investments, L.P. v. Craig A. Reichel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[T]o establish a claim for unjust enrichment, the claimant must show that another party knowingly received something of value to which he was not entitled, and that the circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that person to retain the benefit.” d 725, 729 (Minn. App. 2001).
Starry Electric, Inc. v. Gilman Cooperative Creamery Association, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Starry Electric, Inc. v. Gilman Cooperative Creamery Association, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Tony’s Construction v. Kraus-Anderson Construction Company, St. Louis County Schools - ISD #2142 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Tony’s Construction v. Kraus-Anderson Construction Company, St. Louis County Schools - ISD #2142 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Here, the parties agree that Tony’s conferred a benefit, and ISD received a benefit from the change orders allegedly performed by Tony’s. In determining Tony’s unjust-enrichment claim, we are asked to determine whether ISD was unjustly enriched “in the sense that the term ‘unjustly’ could mean illegally or unlawfully.” (quotation omitted).
Terry L. Gates, et al v. Michael L. Macken, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Terry L. Gates, et al v. Michael L. Macken, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Schumacher v. 5 Schumacher, –30 (Minn. App. 2001) (extending the doctrine of unjust enrichment to morally wrong acts).
CSM Equities, LLC v. Woodland Village Investments Limited Partnership, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2016
CSM Equities, LLC v. Woodland Village Investments Limited Partnership, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“In order to establish a claim for unjust enrichment, the claimant must show that another party knowingly received something of value to which he was not entitled, and that the circumstances are such that it would be unjust for that person to retain the benefit.”
Soderberg & Vail, LLC v. Meshbesher & Spence, Ltd. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Soderberg & Vail, LLC v. Meshbesher & Spence, Ltd. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
An action for “unjust enrichment does not lie simply because one party benefits from the efforts of others; instead, it must be shown that a party was unjustly enriched in the sense that the term ‘unjustly’ could mean illegally or unlawfully” or in the sense that “the [retaining party’s] conduct in retaining the benefit is morally wrong.” (quotation omitted).
Todd Anderson v. Patricia Lloyd Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Todd Anderson v. Patricia Lloyd Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[T]o prevail on a claim of unjust enrichment, a claimant must establish an implied-in- law or quasi-contract in which the defendant received a benefit of value that unjustly enriched the defendant in a manner that is illegal or unlawful,” Caldas, d at 838, or “morally wrong,” –30 (Minn. App. 2001).
Diversified Water Diversion, Inc. v. Hogenson Properties, Ltd. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Diversified Water Diversion, Inc. v. Hogenson Properties, Ltd. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
A claim for unjust enrichment requires a showing that “another party knowingly received something of value to which he was not entitled, and that the circumstances are 7 such that it would be unjust for that person to retain the benefit.”