tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7536265591661518152.post526322896887310934..comments2024-03-13T09:09:48.146-07:00Comments on Law School Case Briefs | Legal Outlines | Study Materials: Schott v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation case brief LawSchoolCaseBriefs.nethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16912283726092434270noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7536265591661518152.post-67547230296456670632014-05-17T16:29:26.737-07:002014-05-17T16:29:26.737-07:00 Schott v. Westinghouse
o ISSUE: Did the compan... Schott v. Westinghouse<br />o ISSUE: Did the company become contractually obligated to one of its employees as a result of the program, where company promised to pay employee if suggestion was adopted, and employee submitted suggestion which he claimed was adopted, but which company claims it rejected?<br />HOLDING: Schott can’t recover under contract theory, but possibly can for unjust enrichment, so his claim should not be dismissed for a demurrer.<br />§ PL would need to show that D was unjustly enriched at his expense and that his idea was reduced to concrete form, and is novel, and that he didn’t offer the idea gratuitously and intended to be compensated.<br />o Dissent – contract was formed, it was fully executed, therefore what happened years later doesn’t matter. LawSchoolCaseBriefs.nethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16912283726092434270noreply@blogger.com