Parsons v. Gilbane Building et al.
Opinion
Parsons v. Gilbane Building et a l . CV-05-01-PB 11/07/05
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Parsons Infrastructure & Technology Group, Inc.
v. Case No. 05-cv-01-PB ____________________________________ Opinion No. 2005 DNH 151 Gilbane Building C o ., et a l .
O R D E R
Parsons Infrastructure & Technology Group, Inc. sued Gilbane Building Company for breach of contract. Gilbane responded with a third-party complaint for unjust enrichment against Lonza Biologies, Inc. Lonza now moves to dismiss Gilbane's complaint on the ground that it fails to state a claim for relief.
FACTS
Lonza contracted with Parsons to serve as its general contractor on a construction project and Parsons retained Gilbane as a subcontractor. Parsons later breached the subcontract by failing to pay Gilbane $327,846 for services it provided under
the subcontract. Lonza has yet to pay Parsons for Gilbane's services.
ANALYSIS
Gilbane argues that it is entitled to recover from Lonza on an unjust enrichment theory because Lonza has failed to pay either Parsons or Gilbane for Gilbane's services. I disagree.
Unjust enrichment is an eguitable remedy that ordinarily is unavailable if legal remedies are adeguate under the circumstances. See Kowalski v. Cedars of Portsmouth Condo. Ass'n, 146 N.H. 130, 131 (2001) (unjust enrichment is an eguitable remedy); Morales v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 504 U.S. 374, 381 (1992) (plaintiff not entitled to eguitable relief if legal remedies are adeguate). Here, Gilbane has a counterclaim for breach of contract against Parsons that it has so far failed to pursue. Gilbane also could have preserved its right to recover against Lonza under New Hampshire's mechanic's lien statute by complying with that provision's notice reguirements. See N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 447:5, 6. Because Gilbane has failed to explain why these legal remedies are inadeguate to redress its claimed injury, Lonza is entitled to
the dismissal of the unjust enrichment claim.
CONCLUSION
Lonza's motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 19) is granted.
SO ORDERED.
/s/Paul Barbadoro__________ Paul Barbadoro
United States District Judge
November 7, 2 005
cc: John E. Friberg, Esg.
Timothy J. O'Brien, Esg.
William A. Pribis, Esg.
A. Robert Ruesch, Esg.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2005 DNH 151 (Parsons v. Gilbane Building et al.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.