Case Name: Aetna Casualty and Surety Company, Respondent, v. Utica Structural Steel, Inc., Appellant, et al., Defendants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1946-03-06
Citations: 270 A.D. 871
Docket Number: 
Parties: Aetna Casualty and Surety Company, Respondent, v. Utica Structural Steel, Inc., Appellant, et al., Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 270
Pages: 871–872

Head Matter:
Fourth Department,
March, 1946.
(March 6, 1946.)
Aetna Casualty and Surety Company, Respondent, v. Utica Structural Steel, Inc., Appellant, et al., Defendants.

Opinion:
Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Memorandum: The complaint as we read it states causes of action for recovery against an alleged undisclosed principal. The allegations of the second and fourth causes of action show no necessity for the equitable relief of reformation. As to the first and third causes such necessity is doubtful. In any event, however, the demand for both legal and equitable relief does not render the complaint bad for insufficiency. (Wainwright & Page v. Burr & MeAuley, 272 N. Y. 130; City of Syracuse v. Hogan, 234 N. Y. 457; Hahl v. Sugo, 169 N. Y. 109; Dennin v. Powers, 96 Misc. 252, 256.) All concur. (The order denies a motion of defendant Utica Structural Steel, Inc., to dismiss plaintiff's complaint in an action to reform insurance policies.) Present — Taylor, P. J., Dowling, Harris, McCurn and Love, JJ.