—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered August 24, 2001, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint in part, unanimously modified, on the law, to grant the motion in its entirety, and thus to dismiss plaintiffs remaining claim alleging fraudulent inducement, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint.
Even if we were to accept, for the purpose of the motion to dismiss, that plaintiffs conflicting allegations may be interpreted as stating a claim against defendant for misrepresentation of a present fact collateral to the engagement letter (see Deerfield Communications Corp. v Chesebrough-Ponds, Inc.,
Plaintiffs breach of oral contract claim was correctly dismissed since the terms of the alleged oral “take down” agreement conflicted with the terms of the engagement letter (see Mitchill v Lath,
The breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing claim was properly dismissed since it was merely a substitute for a nonviable breach of contract claim (see Murphy v American Home Prods. Corp.,
We have considered plaintiffs other arguments, including
