With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". money is incapable of being ‘described or identified in the same manner as a specific chattel’ ..., it is not the proper subject of a conversion action.” Id. (internal citation omitted). In its conversion cause of action, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s “intentional unauthorized use of coins ... resulted in loss and damage to the City of Syracuse[.]” See Dkt. No. 22 at ¶ 182. Plaintiff does not specifically allege how much money was allegedly converted by Defendant and, in its prayer for relief, simply requests a “[j]udgment against defendant!] for compensatory [damages], in an amount to be determined at trial.” This conclusory allegation is insufficient to support a claim for conversion. See In re Bernard L. Madoff Inv. Securities LLC, 458 B.R. 87, 133 (Bkrtcy.S.D.N.Y.2011) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, Plaintiff fails to allege that

A: recognizing that an action will lie for conversion of money when its identification is possible and there is an obligation to deliver the specific money in question or otherwise particularly treat the specific money
B: holding that because the complaint does not seek a specific amount of money converted from a particular account but rather an award of compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial it fails to state a claim for conversion under new york law
C: holding that although the trial courts failure to determine amount of fees does not render underlying order nonfinal the fee award itself is not reviewable until the amount is determined
D: holding prejudgment interest is to be determined on the entire amount of compensatory damages and then reduced by the amount of interest which would have accrued at present value on the settlement amount determined before trial
B.