Opinion
February 9, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Irma Vidal Santaella, J.).
On argument, plaintiffs' counsel stated that the cause of action as pleaded is for breach of contract only, notwithstanding the complaint's reference to fraud. Taking counsel at his word, we find, in the circumstances, that the complaint adequately gives notice of the transaction giving rise to the contract action. Any paucity of detail may be remedied through a bill of particulars and discovery.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Carro, Milonas and Kassal, JJ.