The Second Department, reversing Supreme Court, determined the complaint did not adequately allege breach of contract or quasi contract and therefore should have been dismissed:
“[T]o state a cause of action to recover damages for a breach of contract, the plaintiff’s allegations must identify the provisions of the contract that were breached” … . Here, the complaint failed to specify the provision of the parties’ contract that was allegedly breached … .
… Supreme Court should have granted those branches of the defendant’s motion which were pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the causes of action alleging quasi contract sounding in restitution and unjust enrichment. The parties do not dispute that a contract … exists … . We Transp., Inc. v Westbury Union Free Sch. Dist., 2023 NY Slip Op 04394, Second Dept 8-23-23
Practice Point: A complaint alleging breach of contract does not state a cause of action if the specific provisions alleged to have been breached are not identified.
Practice Point: Where the existence of a contract is conceded, a cause of action for quasi contract must be dismissed.