In Terry v. Bender (1956) 143 Cal. App. 2d 198, the contracting party's corrupt payments and services to the mayor were contingent on the perpetuation of the personal service contract in question, although extrinsic to it. The court expressly held that the interest revealed by the pleading was clearly a disqualifying one, because it was to the public officer's pecuniary advantage to insure the perpetuation of the contract. The court explained that the mayor's "interest" in the contract tainted it with illegality at least during the existence of his prohibited interest, which it characterized as a personal interest that might interfere with the unbiased discharge of his duty to the public or prevent the exercise of his absolute loyalty to the best interests of City. ( Id. at p. 207.) The court concluded that at the time the mayor voted to approve the warrant to Bender, he had acquired such an interest in the latter's contract as restricted his free exercise of the discretion vested in him for the public good. He had "placed himself in a position of economic servitude to Bender, his continued free use of the property passing to him from Bender and his appropriation of the rents therefrom being dependent on Bender's retention of his contract with the city. The mayor had agreed to use his official position and influence in Bender's behalf in exchange for the monetary benefits flowing from Bender's largesse towards him." (Ibid.)