Contrary to plaintiff's assertions, the IAS court properly dismissed plaintiff's action seeking to recover for work, labor, services and materials provided by the plaintiff at the defendants' cooperative apartment. In that regard, the court was warranted in determining that the oral contract entered into between the parties was void and unenforceable due to plaintiff's admitted failure to obtain a home improvement license as required by Administrative Code of the City of New York § 20-387 (a). Moreover, the court appropriately concluded that plaintiff's failure to plead and possess the requisite license to perform home improvement contracts barred plaintiff's recovery in either contract or quantum meruit regardless of whether the work was performed satisfactorily or whether the failure to obtain the license was willful (Mortise v 55 Liberty Owners Corp., 102 A.D.2d 719, affd 63 N.Y.2d 743; Chosen Constr. Corp. v Syz, 138 A.D.2d 284, 286; Hammerman v Jamco Indus., 119 A.D.2d 544).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Carro, Milonas, Kassal and Wallach, JJ.