Also of special note are three cases involving claims for restitution of premiums paid on illegal life insurance policies. The cases are the tip of a large iceberg. The secondary market in life insurance policies has led people to buy life insurance on the lives of strangers (which is prohibited because of the lack of an insurable interest) or fictitious people (which is fraud). The cases involve claims by downstream purchasers to recover premiums they paid when they are not entitled to the insurance benefit. The three cases are Geronta Funding v Brighthouse Life Insurance Co (§138), Sun Life Assurance Co of Canada v Wells Fargo Bank NA (§150) and Wells Fargo Bank NA v Estate of Malkin (§154). The issue of inquiry notice also looms large in these cases.

Plaintiff ABI did renovation work on defendant’s home pursuant to multiple contracts and change orders. Plaintiff filed a lawsuit when defendant refused to pay for the work. The court of common pleas held that the contracts were unenforceable for failure to comply with multiple provisions of the Home Improvement and Consumer Protection Act. The court allowed a fallback claim that was described both as a quantum meruit claim and an unjust enrichment claim. Plaintiff “produced over five hundred (500) pages of receipts, time sheets, invoices, documents signed by Jang, emails, and other evidence of the work ABI performed”. The court of common pleas held that it must decide for defendant