
    Family Finance Corporation, Appellant, v. National Surety Corporation, Respondent, et al., Defendants.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    May 19, 1943.
    
      
      Julius Winn for appellant.
    
      Samuel Wollan for respondent.
   Memorandum: Per Curiam.

A contingent or hypothetical pleading is improper. Such a pleading does not either deny or confess and avoid, as required by statute. (Stroock Plush Co. v. Talcott. 129 App. Div. 14.)

Order modified by granting1 plaintiff’s motion to strike out the first and second defenses in answer, with leave to serve an amended answer within five days after service of order entered hereon, and as modified affirmed, without costs.

Hammer, Shientag and Hecht, JJ., concur.  