Intent to Charge for Unsolicited Benefits Conferred in an Emergency: A Case Study in the Meaning of 'Unjust' in the Restatement (Third) of Restitution & Unjust Enrichment
Louis E. Wolcher
University of Washington School of Law
September 17, 2011
Washington and Lee Law Review, Vol. 68, No. 3, p. 911, 2011
University of Washington School of Law Research Paper No. 2011-24
This Article is a legal and jurisprudential case study that attempts to shed light on the use of the word "unjust" in the law of restitution as it has been reinterpreted by the new Restatement (Third) of Restitution & Unjust Enrichment. The particular case studied is the legal meaning of the term "intent to charge" in the law’s treatment of claims for unsolicited benefits conferred in emergencies. The author conducts a thought experiment involving the use of a sworn "Declaration of Intent to Charge for Benefits Conferred" to illustrate certain ambiguities and difficulties in the way the new Restatement deals with this legal category. The Article exploits the thought experiment and the difficulties it uncovers in order to advance the author’s primary purpose, which is to retrieve dialectically a certain necessary independence for the idea of justice in the development of the substantive law of unjust enrichment.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 38Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: September 19, 2011 ; Last revised: May 11, 2013
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo8 in 1.016 seconds