Memorandum of Points and Authorities
Brief Procedural History
Plaintiff and Defendant had an agreement whereby Plaintiff rented out its property to Defendant. Plaintiff asked Defendant to pay in cash only. Defendant complied and made all payments in cash. Plaintiff filed this frivolous suit to harass Defendant.
During the hearing before the court, Plaintiff falsely claimed that Defendant did not pay rent for the months of July, August and September. Defendant presented money orders for payments made for the months of August and September. Defendant could not find the money order for July and the judge gave him a week to find it. Plaintiff insisted that the receipt could not be found because it not did not exist.
Eventually, Defendant found the receipt for July and presented it before the court. Defendant avers that Plaintiff is liable for unjust enrichment and perjury.
Argument
Plaintiff is Liable for Unjust Enrichment
Defendant hereby incorporates the contents of the foregoing paragraphs as though set out in full herein.
The elements of an unjust enrichment claim are “a benefit conferred upon a defendant by the plaintiff, the defendant’s appreciation of the benefit, and the defendant’s acceptance and retention of the benefit under circumstances that make it inequitable for him to retain it without paying the value thereof.” Ruck Bros. Brick, Inc. v. Kellogg & Kimsey, Inc., 668 So.2d 205, 207 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).
Defendant paid his rent to Plaintiff for the months of July, August and September. For reasons unknown to Defendant, Plaintiff stated that Defendant had not paid rent for the months of July, August and September. The lawsuit filed by Plaintiff is an attempt to use this Court to fulfil its ulterior motive of obtaining more money from Defendant in the form of damages, while he already paid all rent that was due.
The benefit conferred upon Plaintiff was payment of rent by Defendant. Defendant paid all rent for July, August, and September. Plaintiff claimed that rent for July August and September had not been paid and Defendant produced receipts refuting the claims. Awarding judgment in favor of Plaintiff will confer upon it a benefit that it has already received from Defendant.
Plaintiff is only entitled to one month’s rent for every month only. Defendant already paid all rent amounts due to Plaintiff, including rent for July, August and September. Plaintiff is not entitled to any other monies from Defendant.
Plaintiff is liable for unjust enrichment and ought to pay damages to Defendant.
Plaintiff has Come to Court with Unclean Hands
Defendant hereby incorporates the contents of the foregoing paragraphs as though set out in full herein.
“Unclean hands is an equitable defense that is akin to fraud; its “purpose is to discourage unlawful activity.” Original Great Am. Chocolate Chip Cookie Co. v. River Valley Cookies, Ltd., 970 F.2d 273, 281 (7th Cir. 1992). “It is a self-imposed ordinance that closes the doors of a court of equity to one tainted with inequitableness or bad faith relative to the matter in which he seeks relief[.]” Precision Instrument Mfg. Co. v. Auto. Maint. Mach. Co., 324 U.S. 806, 814, 65 S.Ct. 993, 89 L.Ed. 1381 (1945). This court has equated “sneaky and deceitful” with “unclean hands”…. “Equity will stay its hand where a party is guilty of conduct condemned by honest and reasonable men. Unscrupulous practices, overreaching, concealment, trickery or other unconscientious conduct are sufficient to bar relief.” 22 Fla.Jur.2d, Equity, § 50. Hensel v. Aurilio, 417 So.2d 1035, 1038 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); see also Precision Instrument, 324 U.S. at 819, 65 S.Ct. 993 (indicating that the unclean hands doctrine justifies dismissal of a plaintiff’s claim where “inequitable conduct impregnate[s the] entire cause of action”).” Congress Park Off. v. First Citizens Bank, 105 So. 3d 602 (2013).
In its Complaint, Plaintiff seeks equitable relief of an order of specific performance compelling Defendant to pay rent of the months July, August and September. However, the Complaint has been filed in bad faith since all monies claimed by Plaintiff have already been paid by Defendant. Defendant has provided receipts as proof of payment of rent to Plaintiff.
Plaintiff’s acceptance of money paid by Defendant and later filing a Complaint falsely stating that it had not received monies from Defendant is inequitable, deceitful, dishonest, and overreaching conduct. It is untenable for Plaintiff to attempt to fool the court and still expect judgment in its favor from the same court.
Plaintiff is Liable for Perjury
Defendant hereby incorporates the contents of the foregoing paragraphs as though set out in full herein.
“In the decisional law of Florida, perjury is defined as the willful giving of false testimony under lawful oath on a material matter in a judicial proceeding. E.g., Gordon v. State, 104 So.2d 524 (Fla. 1958); Miller v. State, 15 Fla. 577 (1876).” Adams v. Murphy, 394 So. 2d 411 (1981).
Plaintiff knowingly made a false statement that Defendant had not paid his rent for July, August and September. The statement was in regard to a material fact that is the subject matter of the present case. It was made in a pleading submitted to a court of law, which is considered as giving a statement under oath.
Plaintiff is liable for perjury.
Dated this _____ day of March, 2022.
Respectfully Submitted,
___________________________________
Oriol D’La-Vega,
Defendant in pro per
At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, we will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible.