Unjust enrichment.

A cause of action for unjust enrichment does not lie where it merely duplicates or replaces a contract or tort claim, including tortious interference.

WarnerDirect, LLC v. Paramount Global, NY Slip Op 05330 (1st Dep't October 2, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Appellate Practice: Bench Trials.

In reviewing a trial court's findings of fact following a non-jury trial, the Appellate Division's authority is as broad as that of the trial court and includes the power to render the judgment it finds warranted by the facts, taking into account in a close case the fact that the trial judge had the advantage of seeing the witnesses.

Arden Besunder, P.C. v. Harwood, NY Slip Op 05211 (2d Dep't October 1, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Appellate practice: Superseding judgments.

The amended judgment, sua sponte, merely corrected typographical errors and annexed plaintiff's costs and disbursements. It did not affect any substantive rights decided upon the original judgment and does not supersede the original judgment for purposes of taking an appeal.

21st Mtge. Corp. v. Jin Hua Lin, NY Slip Op 05288 (1st Dep't October 2, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Contract law: Oral modifications.

The statute of frauds bars an oral modification where the contract provides that modifications must be in writing, but an oral modification is enforceable if there is partial performance.

2261 Realty, LLC v. Cai Ping Wang, NY Slip Op 05210 (2d Dep't October 1, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Leave to amend.

Leave to amend a pleading should be freely granted absent prejudice or surprise or unless the proposed amendment is palpably insufficient or patently devoid of merit, pursuant to CPLR 3025 [b].

Norguard Ins. Co. v. 148 W. Owner, LLC, NY Slip Op 05193 (1st Dep't September 30, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Leave to renew.

A motion for leave to renew requires a change in the law that would change the prior determination. A clarification of the decisional law is sufficient to support renewal.

Bank of Am. N.A. v. Levada, NY Slip Op 05056 (2d Dep't September 24, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Striking a pleading.

Plaintiff's motion to strike the answer is denied because counsel's affirmation of good faith is insufficient. Counsel states only perfunctorily that defendants failed to comply with four court orders for a deposition and that he contacted defendants on a certain date to confirm the deposition. Counsel fails to attest that he conducted an in-person or telephonic conference, as required by 22 NYCRR 202.20-f(b).

Servan v. ES Bldrs. Group, LLC, NY Slip Op 05184 (1st Dep't September 25, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Contract law.

An agent executing a contract on behalf of a disclosed principal is not liable for breach in the absence of clear and explicit evidence of the agent's intention to assume personal liability.

166-20 Union Turnpike, LLC v. Tavak, LLC, NY Slip Op05054 (2d Dep't September 24, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Personal jurisdiction.

A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a non-domiciliary who, in person or through an agent,  transacts any business within the State, pursuant to CPLR 302(a)(1). The statute requires purposeful activities, that is, those with which a defendant, through volitional acts, avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the State, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws.

McGuire v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Springfield, NY Slip Op 05154 (1st Dep't September 25, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Appellate practice.

The Appellate Division will not decide an issue based on a position that was not argued, either on appeal or below. Resolving disputes in such a manner would be impractical and an obstacle to the orderly administration of justice. While dispositive legal arguments may be raised for the first time on appeal, the arguments must actually be raised.

938 St. Nicholas Ave. Lender LLC v. 936-938 Cliffcrest Hous. Dev. Fund Corp., NY Slip Op 05052 (1st Dep't September 23, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Summary judgment.

It is well settled that a court's role in deciding a motion for summary judgment is issue finding, not issue determination. Moreover, in deciding the motion, it is not the court's function to assess credibility. Here, the parties' conflicting versions of how the accident occurred preclude summary judgment.

Wachtel v. Alan Joel Communications, Inc., NY Slip Op 05053 (1st Dep't September 23, 2025)

Here is the decision.