
    WICKS v. LONDON & LANCASHIRE FIRE INS. CO.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    February 10, 1905.)
    Insurance—Actions—Defense—Tender.
    Where, in an action on a policy, plaintiff was entitled to recover for certain awnings destroyed by the fire, a tender not including the same was insufficient to constitute a defense.
    [Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 45, Cent. Dig. Tender, § 22.]
    Appeal from Trial Term,- New York County.
    Action by Jacob Wicks, Jr., against the London & Lancashire Fire Insurance Company. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    See 184 N. Y. 593, 77 N. E. 1198.
    Argued before VAN BRUNT, P. J., and HATCH, McLAUGHLIN, O’BRIEN, and INGRAHAM, JJ.
    Ernest A. Cardozo, for appellant.
    Gustav Lange, Jr., for respondent.
   INGRAHAM, J.

As we have concluded on the appeal by the plaintiff from the judgment that the plaintiff was entitled to recover for the awnings destroyed by the fire, the tender of the defendant was not sufficient, and therefore was not a defense to this action.

It follows that this judgment should be affirmed, with costs. Ah concur.  