On December 2, 2021, Justice Reed of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Lanaras v. Premium Ocean, LLC, 2021 NY Slip Op. 51128(U), holding that an unjust enrichment claim failed for lack of a sufficiently close relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant, explaining:
To adequately plead unjust enrichment, a plaintiff must allege that (1) the other party was enriched, (2) at that party’s expense, and (3) that it is against equity and good conscience to permit the other party to retain what is sought to be recovered. The Court of Appeals held in Georgia Malone that an unjust enrichment claim need not establish privity between the parties, but at a minimum must assert a connection between the parties that is not too attenuated. There, the Court held that the relationship was too attenuated where plaintiff and defendant had no dealings with one another. The Court of Appeals in Mandarin Trading Ltd. made clear that there were no indicia of an enrichment that was unjust where the pleadings failed to indicate a relationship between the parties that could have caused reliance or inducement.
Sarrigeorgiou is the husband of Lanaras’s long-time friend Paparizou. While the two know one another, there were no dealings between Lanaras and Sarrigeorgiou. The pleadings do not include any allegations of a relationship between Sarrigeogiou and Lanaras that could have caused reliance or inducement. Sarrigeorgiou’s proximity to Paparizou and her businesses does not establish direct dealings with Lanaras. There is little mention of the interaction between Lanaras and Sarrigeorgiou at all. The motion to dismiss the unjust enrichment claim against Sarrigeorgiou is granted.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).