On September 30, 2026, the Second Department issued a decision in Board of Educ. of the Blind Brook-Rye Union Free Sch. Dist. v. Kliment Halsband Architects, 2026 NY Slip Op. 05512, holding that a contract claim cannot be reframed as a tory claim, explaining:
The Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the first cause of action, alleging negligence, insofar as asserted against it as duplicative of the cause of action alleging breach of contract. A simple breach of contract is not to be considered a tort unless a legal duty independent of the contract itself has been violated, and where a plaintiff is essentially seeking enforcement of the bargain, the action should proceed under a contract theory. In determining whether a tort claim lies, courts evaluate the nature of the injury, how the injury occurred and the harm it caused. Here, the complaint did not allege facts that would give rise to a duty owed to the plaintiff that was independent of the duty imposed by the parties’ contract, and the plaintiff was essentially seeking the contractual benefit of its bargain. The injury alleged by the plaintiff was the result of the defendant’s alleged failure to perform under the contract, and thus, there was no injury alleged here that is not already encompassed in the cause of action to recover damages for breach of contract.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).