[MM_Access_Decision access='false']

1. Plaintiff has conferred a benefit on the defendant, who has knowledge thereof;
2. Defendant voluntarily accepts and retains the benefit conferred; and
3. The circumstances render the defendant’s retention of the benefit inequitable unless the defendant pays to the plaintiff the value of the benefit.

Subscribers To The Florida Litigation Guide Can See:

• The rest of the elements for this cause of action;
• The citations to the most recent state and federal court cases citing the cause of action;
• The statute of limitations; and
• The defenses to this cause of action.

Click Here To See A Sample Chapter From The Guide

Subscribe to The Florida Litigation Guide To Access Everything!

[/MM_Access_Decision] [MM_Access_Decision access='true']

1. Plaintiff has conferred a benefit on the defendant, who has knowledge thereof;
2. Defendant voluntarily accepts and retains the benefit conferred; and
3. The circumstances render the defendant’s retention of the benefit inequitable unless the defendant pays to the plaintiff the value of the benefit.

---

FLORIDA STATE COURTS

First District: CMH Homes, Inc. v. LSFC Co., 118 So.3d 964, 965 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013); 14th & Heinberg, LLC v. Terhaar and Cronley Gen. Contractors, Inc., 43 So.3d 877, 881 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).

Second District: CFLB P’ship, LLC v. Diamond Blue Int’, Inc., 352 So.3d 357, 359 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022); Rost Invs., LLC v. Cameron, 302 So. 3d 445, 451 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020); Malamud v. Syprett, 117 So.3d 434, 437 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013).

Third District:  Crawley-Kitzman v. Hernandez, 324 So. 3d 968, 975 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021); Gutierrez v. Sullivan, 2022 WL 220949, *3 (Fla. 3d DCA Jan. 26, 2022); Duty Free World, Inc. v. Miami Perfume Junction, Inc., 253 So.3d 689, 693 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018).

Fourth District: Murphy v. Pankauski, 2023 WL 2170706, *2 (Fla. 4^th DCA Feb. 22, 2023); Point Conversions, LLC v. WPB Hotel Partners, LLC, 324 So. 3d 947,956 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021); F.H. Paschen, S.N. Nielsen & Assocs. LLC v. B&B Site Dev., Inc., 311 So. 3d 39, 48 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).

Fifth District: Sherman Hills Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Gibson, 403 So. 3d 1101, 1106 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025); Baron v. Osman, 39 So.3d 449, 451 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010); Am. Safety Ins. Co., v. Griggs, 959 So.2d 322, 331 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007).

FLORIDA FEDERAL COURTS

Eleventh Circuit: Taxinet Corp. v. Leon, 114 F.4th 1212, 1219 (11th Cir. 2024); Poet Theatricals Marine, LLC v. Celebrity Cruises, Inc., 2023 WL 3454614, *5 (11th Cir. May 15, 2023); Marrache v. Bacardi U.S.A., Inc., 17 F.4th 1084, 1101 (11th Cir. 2021); Pincus v. Am. Traffic Sols., Inc, 986 F.3d 1305, 1311 (11th Cir. 2021).

Southern District: Hayden v. Urvan, No. 21-CV-82051, 2024 WL 3981764, at *4 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 27, 2024); Craig v. Nova Se. Univ., 2023 WL 3600043, *6 (S.D. Fla. May 23, 2023); Spofford v. Beta LP / Alpha Tr., 2023 WL 3778252, *9 (S.D. Fla. May 8, 2023); Neurosurgical Consultants of S. Fla., LLC v. UnitedHealthcare Ins. Co., 2023 WL 3157504, *4 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 27, 2023).

Middle District: Garcia v. Character Techs., Inc., No. 6:24-CV-1903-ACC-UAM, 2025 WL 1461721, at *18 (M.D. Fla. May 21, 2025); Collaboration Betters The World, Inc. v. Hertz Corp., 2023 WL 3931822, *2 (M.D. Fla. June 9, 2023); Kava Culture Franchise Grp. Corp. v. Dar-Jkta Enters. LLC, 2023 WL 3121893, *6 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 27, 2023); State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Lewin, 535 F. Supp. 3d 1247, 1266 (M.D. Fla. 2021). 

Northern District: In re Mun. Parking Services, Inc. DPPA Litig., No. 3:24CV320-TKW-HTC, 2025 WL 1475778, at *4 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 16, 2025); United States v. Calvary Constr. Grp., INC., 2023 WL 3884642, *5 (N.D. Fla. May 18, 2023); Alt. Materials, LLC v. TCH Constr. Grp., Inc., 2023 WL 2742003, *2 (N.D. Fla. Mar. 8, 2023); Sport & Wheat, CPA, PA v. ServisFirst Bank, Inc., 479 F.Supp.3d 1247, 1254 (N.D. Fla. 2020). 

---

2 Defenses to Claim for Unjust Enrichment

(1) Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.110(d) (pleading affirmative defenses), and other standard defenses. See § 1.

(2) Statute of Limitations: § 95.11(3)(j), Fla. Stat. (four years); Beltran v. Vincent P. Miraglia, M.D., P.A., 125 So.3d 855, 859 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013).

(3) Plaintiff cannot recover money paid under a mistake of fact when the payee “received it in good faith in satisfaction of an equitable claim, nor where it was due in honor and conscience“. Pensacola and A. R. Co. v. Braxton, 34 Fla. 471, 16 So. 317, 317 (1894); Equilease Corp. v. Hentz, 634 F.2d 850, 853 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).

(4) Plaintiff cannot obtain restitution through unjust enrichment when criminal or other wrongful conduct was utilized to confer the benefit. Restatement of Restitution § 140 (1937); see also Jacobson v. Pfizer, Inc., 618 F. App’x. 509, 511 (11th Cir. 2015).

(5) Unjust enrichment is unavailable when a change in circumstances renders payment to plaintiff for the benefit conferred inequitable. Restatement of Restitution §§ 142, 143 (1937).

(6) Unjust enrichment is unavailable when defendants prove that an express contract exists. Williams v. Bear Stearns & Co., 725 So. 2d 397, 399 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); Alhassid v. Nationstar Mortg. LLC, No. 18-13676, 2019 WL 2025227, at *3 (11th Cir. May 8, 2019); Garcia v. Character Techs., Inc., No. 6:24-CV-1903-ACC-UAM, 2025 WL 1461721, at *18 (M.D. Fla. May 21, 2025).

[/MM_Access_Decision]