In Allied Erecting & Dismantling Co., Inc. v. Uneco Realty Co., 146 Ohio App.3d 136, 2001 Ohio 3387, 2001 Ohio 3388, 765 N.E.2d 420, the court held that an equitable claim is only precluded by the existence of a contract where the basis for the equitable claim is within the scope of the contract, but that case is factually distinguishable.
The parties in Allied Erecting included a primary contractor on an Ohio Department of Transportation ("ODOT") project, a subcontractor, and the subcontractor's exclusive dirt supplier.
When supplied dirt did not meet ODOT specifications, the dirt supplier incurred additional expenses for site work that it was requested to perform.
The dirt supplier asserted an unjust enrichment claim against the prime contractor, with whom it had no contract and no contractual privity.
The appellate court concluded that the prime contractor was not entitled to a directed verdict on the dirt supplier's unjust enrichment claim, in part, because there was testimony that the extra work performed by the dirt supplier was not within the scope of any of the parties' contractual obligations.