
    Royal Silk Underwear Manufacturing Co., Inc., Respondent, v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, Appellant.
    
      Insurance (burglary) — contract — action to reform and recover on policy of burglary insurance —: defenses that president of insured committed burglary and that it had failed to keep required books.
    
    
      Royal Silk Underwear Mfg. Co,, Inc.,.-v. United StaJtes F. & G. Cd., 216 App. Div. 772, affirmed.
    (Argued December 2, 1926;
    decided December 31, 1926.)
    Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered March 31, 1926, unanimously affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. The action was to reform a policy of burglary insurance and to recover thereon. The answer admitted the issuance of the policy and set up as separate defenses, first, that the president of the insured committed the burglary and, second, that plaintiff had violated a condition of the policy requiring it to keep books and accounts so that the actual amount of the loss or damage could be accurately determined.
    
      James C. Van Siclen, Leon M. Prince and Sidney J. Loeb for appellant.
    
      Eugene L. Bondy, M. V. Seligson and I. B. Stein for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

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