Judge Jesse Furman
In state-law claims heard under diversity jurisdiction, Manhattan high-end audio component retailer Ciamara alleged Korean audio component maker Widealab breached a Sept. 13, 2011, agreement naming it the exclusive North American retailer for Widealab’s Aurender S10 product. On Nov. 26, 2011, all references to Ciamara were removed from Widealab’s website. On Jan. 16, 2012, Widealab listed a Ciamara competitor as a North American dealer. Despite ruling that Ciamara’s contract breach claim survived, district court dismissed its claims for fraudulent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, quantum meruit and tortious interference. The court also dismissed Ciamara’s request for damages as speculative. With respect to Ciamara’s fraud claims the court concluded that—in addition to failing to allege falsity—Ciamara’s complaint identified only future, not current, promises. Viewing Ciamara’s unjust enrichment and quantum meruit claims as a single quasi-contract claim the court concluded that Ciamara’s expenditures purportedly made in reliance on statements by Widealab and its officers occurred after the allegedly inducing statements and the execution of the contract governing the business relationship between Ciamara and Widealab.
