Unjust enrichment

After a 7 year long relationship and a break-up with no resolution. I am looking for case law or precedents pertaining to unjust enrichment cases that included cohabiting couples. Sorry if this is a posted in the wrong forum. If I have done so please tell me where to post it. It seems to me that the law doses not recognize cohabiting couples and protect their rights. Any in site or help would be appreciated.

What are you asking? What is your legal question? You cannot seek legal action against someone who simply doesn't want to have a relationship with you any longer.
Unjust enrichment is a principle of British law, not primarily American law and it has nothing whatsoever to do with relationships. Unjust enrichment deals with the obtaining property at the cost of another. For example, lets say I am not home and someone walking past grabs my weed eater off the porch and "sells" it to the neighbor down the street. I drive by my neighbors house and see him using my weed eater. Upon being notified that it is mine, he must return it. This is also the case even when the property isn't obtained through illegal means. This has nothing to do with a relationship ending.

What exactly is it you are trying to do? Sue someone for dumping you?

I am suing my ex-boyfriend in civil court for unjust enrichment. and no I Dump him. We had a seven year relationship that ended. during the seven years we started a business. I invested a lot of money not only in the business but remodeling our home. I basically ended up walking out of the relationship with a shirt on my back and my children. I feel he has been unjustly enriched by our relationship. my question to you was is there any case precedents or law that would help. I cannot be the only woman in the world that is going through in my opinion a divorce without a marriage. I was simply asking for help .

Such as Watts v Watts (Supreme Ct of Wisconsin 1987) any thing like this case.

MAIN RULE

Unmarried cohabitants may raise claims based upon unjust enrichment following the termination of their relationships where one of the parties attempts to retain an unreasonable amount of the property acquired through the efforts of both.

So, your question is, how do you protect your financial interest in the relationship? And does the court view your relationship as a common law marriage?

Watts vs Watts is nearly twenty years old. I haven't time time or inclination to determine if the Court's ruling was upheld on appeal or not. But one thing I feel relatively confident about---it has certainly been challenged/amended/overturned in the last twenty years. Case law precendents are important. But, in order for them to applicable, they need to be as close to current as possible. A case ruled upon twenty years ago has been, I bet, challenged and/or overturned.

Since Wisconsin does not recognize common law marriages, regardless of how long they lasted, you need to rely on other laws to govern the separation of assets accumulated over the course of your relationship. If the items in question are of considerable value, I'd call an attorney and ask for mediation. If it is not that appreciable of an amount, sue in small claims court, but be willing and able to prove what you purchased and to what you contributed.

Marriage is made for a reason, not only from a spiritual standpoint, but also, obviously, in part, for legal protection in cases just like yours. Shack-ups ( I'm not sure what is the proper term to call it ) ---living together long term without the benefit of marriage relationships ( whew that was so much longer!! ) doesn't afford you any protection that married couples have if the marriage dissolves. Doesn't seem fair, but thats how the ball rolls.

Consult an attorney if you feel you have been treated unfairly. But realize, also, that you are not afforded the same protection under the law as a married woman is. Not says me, says the law. But, I am certain that an appreciable amount of money, such as might be gained through a business venture, is worth hiring an attorney. I would do so immediately, but only if you can prove through receipts specifics, such as "On May 3, such and such a year, I wrote a check for the deposit on the building we rented to start our business." And them provide the cancelled check, written on YOUR checking account. Realize, though, that if you had joint checking accounts, savings accounts, etc. it will be a logistical nightmare to separate what was yours and what was not.


Cohabitation Common Law Marriage Under Wisconsin Law

Please check your private message above for information that may be of some help to you. You may have cause in regards to the joint business you posted above and any monies owed you; an attorney would need to review any business agreements, contracts, etc. to determine whether or not that is the case. If he's in fact profiting from the clients in your previous jointly owned business, that might be something to pursue. (Just an example.) If you jointly signed on the home and are currently in title, you are entitled to an equal share of the proceeds upon the sale. (Another example.) You didn't post much about that particular aspect; I'm only using it as an illustration here.

Unfortunately, most US courts don't recognize debts within a cohabitation (unmarried state) unless of course, he borrowed monies from you and neglected to pay it back. That would possibly involve a small claims issue .. and again, an attorney might be of more help with the actual facts, documents, etc. in front of him/her. There's no real "division of assets" in that type of situation; you won't have much luck pursuing that avenue simply by virtue that you weren't married. That being said, there may be something within both the joint business (if in fact it was operated and maintained jointly) and possibly, the house mentioned above.

At the very least, I believe it's worth a telephone call. Good luck.

The President of the Bar Association is a Pre-Paid Legal member the Attorney General and dozens of Former Attorney General are Pre-Paid Legal member also run The Provider Law Firms a nation wide network of attorney that covers every area of law for less than 36.00 a month no you are SCAMMER GRACE

California States Attorney Condemns PREPAID LEGAL PYRAMID
Pre-Paid Legal advertises “one of a kind” services which give “access to valuable benefits that cover the most common legal needs that you will encounter” and “level the playing field” in the legal system. Yet the product is materially flawed, as demonstrated by the terrible retention rates. About 50% of new customers cancel their legal plans within the first year. Before the end of the third year, more than 75% of customers have canceled their plans.
Pre-Paid Legal ripped off a Washington Times columnist.
The associates aren’t selling many memberships! Only about 20% of the Pre-Paid Legal associates sell one or more memberships to outside customers.
Similarities to YourTravelBiz.com (YTB), a company recently sued by the California Attorney General, could mean trouble for Pre-Paid Legal. Multi-level marketing companies that purport to sell products to retail customers have long carried on a charade that included pretending that their distributors were actually selling products to third-party customers. Since no one could prove otherwise, the charade was plausible. With a service-based business like YTB or Pre-Paid Legal, however, it’s much harder to pretend that sales are being made. The numbers are in black and white, and the numbers proved that YTB agents did very little selling of services, in favor of massive recruiting that led to the Attorney General calling it a “gigantic pyramid scheme.

Top Ten Red Flags for Fraud at Pre-Paid Legal Services Inc. (NYSE:PPD). The company is clearly on a decline, with recruitment numbers suffering and overall memberships.
Here are some of the more interesting points in the FDI report:

• The company admits that recruiting is the lifeblood of Pre-Paid Legal, with COO Randy Harp saying: “And as goes recruiting, so goes membership sales.” Well recruiting is down 25% in the first 6 months of 2008, and down 31% in the second quarter alone.

Red Flags of Fraud at Pre-Paid Legal » Sequence Inc. Fraud Files by Tracy Coenen