Majority
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered August 18, 2016, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the causes of action for promissory estoppel, unjust enrichment, and money had and received, and denied the motion to dismiss as to the cause of action for breach of contract, unanimously modified, on the law, to grant the motion as to the breach of contract cause of action, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
The promissory estoppel and unjust enrichment claims are duplicative of the breach of contract claim (see Brown v Brown, 12 AD3d 176 [1st Dept 2004]). A claim for money had and received lies only in the absence of an agreement (Parsa v State of New York, 64 NY2d 143 , 148 [1984]).
Concur—Sweeny, J.P., Gische, Kahn and Gesmer, JJ.
Cases cited
- D & N Boening, Inc. v. Kirsch Beverages, Inc. 63 NY2d 449 at 456-457 p. 417
- Financial Structures Ltd. v. UBS AG 77 AD3d 417 p. 417
- Brown v. Brown 12 AD3d 176 p. 417
- Parsa v. State 64 NY2d 143 at 148 p. 417