Legal Opinion

Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Utica Structural Steel, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 6, 1946Published

1Opinion of the Court

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. *872In 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;…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. City of Syracuse v. . HoganNew York Court of Appeals · 1923
  2. Hahl v. . SugoNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
  3. Wainwright & Page, Inc. v. Burr & McAuley, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1936
  4. Dennin v. PowersNew York Supreme Court · 1916

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API