ELIZABETH PEREZ, vs OLMEN D. SALMERON, et al.,
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed October 7, 2020. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D19-2375 Lower Tribunal No. 18-40128 ________________ Elizabeth Perez, Appellant, vs. Olmen D. Salmeron, et al., Appellees. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Barbara Areces, Judge. Reyes & Luna Law Firm, LLC, and Jessica B. Reyes, for appellant. The Estevez Law Firm, P.A., and Frank J. Estevez, for appellees. Before FERNANDEZ, LINDSEY, and MILLER, JJ. PER CURIAM. Elizabeth and Andre Perez, defendants below, appeal a final summary judgement entered against them and in favor Miriam Y. Lam and Olmen D. Salmeron, plaintiffs below, on the plaintiffs’ claim for unjust enrichment. Finding no reversible error, we affirm. See Duty Free World, Inc. v. Miami Perfume Junction, Inc., 253 So. 3d 689, 693-94 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (“The elements of a cause of action for unjust enrichment are: (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 are such that it would be inequitable for the defendant to retain the benefit without first paying the value thereof to the plaintiff. The basis of the remedy of unjust enrichment is to provide restitution where one person has been unjustly enriched at the expense of another. At the core of the law of restitution and unjust enrichment is the principle that a party who has been unjustly enriched at the expense of another is required to make restitution to the other.” (citations and internal quotation marks omitted)). Affirmed. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
