City of New York v. Cokenes

Finch, J. (dissenting).

I agree that the orders appealed from should be affirmed, except as to the third defense in action No. 1 against Peter J. Cokenes, and the fifth defense in action No. 2 against the same defendant; and also as to the third defense in action No. 1 and the fourth defense in action No. 6, both against the National Refreshment Company. As to these I vote against *698striking out. These defenses are substantially alike and involve the same principle. They are set up by a surety, sued upon a bond to recover arrears due upon a contract, whereunder the city granted concessions to…