The plaintiffs sued the defendant purchaser for unjust enrichment and knowing receipt after the plaintiffs' employee fraudulently pocketed the proceeds from the sale of seven vehicles.
The court dismissed the unjust enrichment claim, finding that the valid contracts of sale constituted a juristic reason for the enrichment.
The knowing receipt claim was also dismissed because the defendant paid fair market value, made reasonable inquiries regarding the unusual payment methods, and was not willfully blind to the employee's fraud.
