
    Isidor Gold and Louis Tuchman, Plaintiff, Appellants, v. Morris Talkow and Thomas Cairo, Defendants, Respondents.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    June 3, 1924.
    Contracts — action for money had and received — such action may be maintained after rescission of contract for fraud.
    Plaintiff may sue for money had and received after a rescission of the contract on the ground of fraud.
    Appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, borough of Manhattan, first district, dismissing plaintiff’s complaint on the merits.
    
      Alfonse F. Spiegel, for the appellants.
    
      Zachery M. Deiman, for the respondents.
   Per Curiam.

There is no doubt that plaintiffs could sue for money had and received after a rescission of the contract for fraud. For a discussion of the principles involved in this form of action, see Miller v. Schloss, 218 N. Y. 400. Defendants should have asked for a bill of particulars of plaintiffs’ cause of action. Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to appellants to abide the event.

All concur; present, Guy, Gavegan and Mitchell, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered.  