The plaintiff brought a claim for unjust enrichment against the defendant, seeking $300,000 for renovations he allegedly performed on her properties during a purported 34-year cohabitation.
The defendant moved for summary judgment to dismiss the claim.
The court found that the plaintiff's evidence was contradictory, noting he had previously testified under oath at his criminal trial for harassing the defendant that their relationship was casual and he was married to someone else.
The court concluded there was no genuine issue requiring a trial, as the defendant provided overwhelming evidence that she solely owned and financed the properties, and the plaintiff was compensated for minor work with room and board.
The motion for summary judgment was granted and the action was dismissed.
