holding that none of the “numerous objections to the proposition that a 4 direct action . . . for unjust enrichment can lie . . . compels the conclusion that such a claim is 5 absolutely foreclosed”
How later courts described this case
- holding that none of the “numerous objections to the proposition that a 4 direct action . . . for unjust enrichment can lie . . . compels the conclusion that such a claim is 5 absolutely foreclosed”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Myrick, J., concurring:
I concur in the judgment. I also concur in the views of Mr. Justice McKee, except as to what is said regarding the power of the State, independent of the provisions of the State Constitution, to restrain or control franchises granted to corporations, -without their consent, and as to the grant of a franchise constituting a contract; upon these subjects I express no opinion.