Sripetch v. SEC · ¶28

The answer to this case follows from that distinction. Under traditional equitable principles, a victim seeking disgorgement of a defendant's unlawful gains does not need to prove he has “suffered a corresponding loss or,” indeed, “any loss.” Restatement (First) of Restitution § 1, Comment e (1936) (First Restatement). Instead, when a victim “has suffered an interference with protected interests,” he may be entitled to “restitution of [the defendant's] wrongful gain” from that interference even when he has suffered “no measurable loss whatsoever.” Third Restatement § 3, Reporter's Note a; id., § 1, Comment a. The point of the remedy is for “the defendant . . . to give to the plaintiff the amount by which he has been enriched” from the wrongful invasion of the plaintiff 's legally protected interests, not to compensate the plaintiff for a financial loss. First Restatement § 1, Comment e.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.