Civil Jury Instructions Home

4.3-3  Unjust Enrichment (Implied-In-Law or Quasi-Contract)

Revised to January 1, 2008

The plaintiff seeks to recover the value of <insert goods/services) (he/she/it) provided because the defendant was unjustly enriched by the plaintiff's provision of <insert goods/services>.  Unjust enrichment means that it is contrary to equity and good conscience for the defendant to retain a benefit that has come to the defendant at the expense of the plaintiff.

To find unjust enrichment, you must find that the plaintiff has provided <insert goods/services>, that the defendant has benefited from those <insert goods/ services>, that the defendant unjustly did not pay for that benefit, and that the defendant's failure to pay hurt the plaintiff.

[<If the plaintiff has pleaded unjust enrichment in the alternative to breach of contract:>  For you to find for the plaintiff under this legal principle, you must first find that there was no written or oral contract expressed in words and no contract implied by conduct for the plaintiff to provide <insert goods/services>.  If you find that there was a contract for the plaintiff to provide <insert goods/ services>, you may not find that the defendant was unjustly enriched.]

Authority

Meaney v. Connecticut Hospital Assn., 250 Conn. 500, 511 (1999); Hartford Whalers Hockey Club v. Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co., 231 Conn. 276, 283 (1994); Bershtein, Bershtein & Bershtein v. Nemeth, 221 Conn. 236, 242 (1992); National CSS, Inc. v. Stamford, 195 Conn. 587, 597 (1985); Brighenti v. New Britain Shirt Corp., 167 Conn. 403, 407 (1974). For a discussion of instructions for cases in which the plaintiff has pleaded contract and unjust enrichment claims in the alternative, see Meaney v. Connecticut Hospital Assn., 250 Conn. 500, 515-23 (1999), and Suffield Development Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Society for Savings, 243 Conn. 832, 846 (1998).