To win a conversion claim, the plaintiff must show that he or she has legal ownership or a superior immediate possessory right or interest in the property that was “converted” and that the defendant excercise dominion over the property or interfered with it, in derogation of the plaintiff’s rights. Pappas v. Tzolis, 20 N.Y.3d 228, 234 (2012); Tudisco v. Duerr, 89 A.D.3d 1372, 1373 (4th Dep’t 2011). Conversion occurs when there is a refusal to return the property upon demand. Salatino v. Salatino, 64 A.D.3d 923, 925 (3d Dep’t 2009). A cause of action for conversion accrues when the conversion takes place. Sporn v. MCA Records, 58 N.Y.2d 482, 487 (1983); see also, Lennon v. Seaman, 63 F. Supp.2d 428, 440 (S.D.N.Y. 1999); Seneca Ins. Co. v. Wilcock, 2002 WL 1067828, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). Conversion cannot be maintained where the damages are merely being sought for a breach of contract. Melcher v. Apollo Med. Fund Mgmt LLC, 25 A.D.3d 482, 483 (1st Dept. 2006); Fesseha v. TD Waterhouse Inv. Servs, 305 A.D.2d 268, 269 (1st Dep’t 2003); Peters Griffin Woodward, Inc. v. WCSC Inc., 88 A.D.2d 883, 884 (1st Dep’t 1982). While money may be the subject of a conversion claim, it must be specifically identified and segregated, and there must be an obligation to return or otherwise treat the specific fund in a particular manner. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co. v. Chemical Bank, 160 A.D.2d 113, 124 (1st Dept. 1990).