Howard Browning and Lynn Anne Poirier lived together in a romantic relationship beginning in 1991. In 1993, the parties entered into an oral agreement in which they each agreed to purchase lottery tickets and to equally share in the proceeds of any winning lottery tickets. On June 2, 2007, Poirier purchased a winning ticket and 'collected one million dollars minus deductions for taxes.' Poirier refused to give Browning half. Browning (P) filed the underlying suit for breach of an oral contract and unjust enrichment. Poirier (D) denied the existence of any oral agreement to split lottery proceeds and raised the defense of the statute of frauds. The trial court granted D a directed verdict. The court found that the action was barred by the statute of frauds. It also held that a party seeking to enforce an express contract cannot simultaneously disavow the contract and seek equitable relief in quasi-contract. A panel of the Fifth District reversed the trial court. A rehearing en banc was granted. The Fifth District 'affirmed the judgment for breach of the alleged oral contract, but reversed that part of the judgment regarding the count for unjust enrichment and remanded this case to the trial court for further proceedings. A question was certified.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.