Unjust enrichment is an equitable remedy closely associated with "impliedcontracts" and trusts. In Hans v. Hans, 482 So.2d 1117 (Miss. 1986), the Court said:
“The doctrine of unjust enrichment or recovery in quasicontract applies to situations where there is no legal contract but where the person sought to be charged is in possession of money or property which in good conscience and justice he should not retain but should deliver to another, the courts imposing a duty to refund the money or the use value of the property to the person to whom in good conscience it ought to belong.”
482 So.2d at 1122. And, in Magnolia Federal Savings & Loan v. Randal CraftRealty, 342 So.2d 1308 (Miss. 1977):
“[t]he terms unjust enrichment and restitution are modern designation for the doctrine of quasi-contracts and the basis for an action for unjust enrichment lies in a promise, which is implied in law, that one will pay to the person entitled thereto which in equity and good conscience is his.”
342 So.2d at 1311.