Graphic Arts Mutual Insurance v. Monello

44 Misc. 2d 588, 254 N.Y.S.2d 351, 1964 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1326
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided November 5, 1964·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff did not make out the cause of action alleged in the complaint. On the other hand, its motion to amend the complaint to allege causes of action for unjust enrichment and money had and received should have been granted. The motion having been denied, the defendant was not on notice that he was called upon to defend a cause of action for unjust enrichment; had the motion been granted, the defendant might have offered evidence instead of resting. In the interest of justice, we therefore remand the case to the court below for a new trial. The judgment should be reversed and new trial ordered, with $30 costs to appellant to abide the event.

Concur — Hofstadter, J. P., Tilzer and Gold, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Graphic Arts Mutual Insurance v. Monello, 44 Misc. 2d 588, 254 N.Y.S.2d 351, 1964 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1326 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

44 Misc. 2d 588 (Graphic Arts Mutual Insurance v. Monello) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Emhart Industries, Inc. v. Home Insurance
515 F. Supp. 2d 228 (D. Rhode Island, 2007)
Town Board of Fallsburgh v. National Surety Corp.
53 Misc. 2d 23 (New York Supreme Court, 1967)