
    Fowler, Curtis Company, Respondent, v. Charles S. Dean, Appellant.
    
      Pleading — action for fraud — sufficiency of complaint.
    
    
      Fowler, Curtis Co. v. Dean, 206 App. Div. 785, affirmed.
    (Argued October 7, 1924;
    decided October 21, 1924.)
    Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered July 27, 1923, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion for a dismissal of the amended complaint under rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice. The plaintiff, a corporation, brought this action in law for fraud against the defendant, a director of the corporation of Cluett, Peabody & Company, to recover damages for an alleged fraudulent statement on the part of the defendant, in orally stating to an officer of the plaintiff corporation that Cluett, Peabody & Company had prior thereto accepted in writing, through the medium of a certain letter, a written offer of the plaintiff to manufacture shirts for Cluett, Peabody & Company at certain prices offered in writing by the plaintiff.
    The following question was certified: “ Does the amended complaint herein state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action? ”
    
      Herbert F. Roy for appellant.
    
      J. Edward Singleton for respondent.
   Order affirmed, with costs; question certified answered in the affirmative; no opinion.

Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane, Andrews and Lehman, JJ.  