FANDY CORP. v. CHANG

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff was not a good-faith purchaser for value of the subject property (see, Yen-Te Hsueh Chen v. Geranium Dev. Corp., 243 A.D.2d 708), and therefore was barred by the doctrine of unclean hands from recovering damages for unjust enrichment (see, Kleeger v. Kleeger, 261 A.D.2d 587). In addition, the existence of an enforceable written contract precluded recovery for unjust enrichment (see, Eagle Comtronics v. Pico Prods., 256 A.D.2d 1202). Moreover, there was no showing that the defendant obtained a benefit that in equity and good conscience he should not have obtained because it rightfully belonged to another (see, Bugarsky v. Marcantonio, 254 A.D.2d 384).

BRACKEN, J.P., SULLIVAN, ALTMAN and KRAUSMAN, JJ., concur.