Justice Alexander W. Hunter Jr.
Darren Henault Interiors (DHI) and Duce Construction sought dismissal of plaintiffs’ complaint against them in this action for quasi-contractual relief for unjust enrichment. Plaintiffs provided painting services to defendants for no payment based on a promise that defendants would provide him plaintiffs paid employment in the future. DHI moved for dismissal arguing the complaint failed to state a cause of action. It claimed plaintiffs provided painting services at charitable event. Duce was the contractor who hired plaintiffs claiming it advised them the job would be uncompensated. Yet, plaintiffs claimed Duce assured them DHI would engage Duce on a future project on W. 70th St. and Duce would hire plaintiffs as painting subcontractors on it. The court noted plaintiffs were induced by Duce’s claims of future work based on their participation in the charitable event uncompensated. It noted Duce was given the project at W. 70th St. by DHI but failed to hire plaintiffs, ruling a claim for unjust enrichment has been established by plaintiffs against DHI and Duce. The court concluded plaintiffs sufficiently stated a cause of action cognizable at law, denying DHI’s motion and Duce’s cross-motion for dismissal.
