
    Arnold Hafelin, Appellant, v. Louis Silverman et al., Respondents.
    Appeal hy the plaintiff from an order made at Special Term denying his motion to compel the delivery of certain chattels replevied herein.
    
      
      P. P. Stafford, for appellant.
    
      D. 0-. Myers, for respondents.
   Ehrlich, Ch. J.

The affidavits on the part of the defendants on the proceedings to rebond the property sufficiently complied with the statute, and the court below had power to allow a new undertaking to bé filed mino joro fame. !

There was, therefore, no abuse of discretion in the court ■below, and the order appealed from, must be affirmed,' with costs. . - ~

Newburger and Vah Wyck, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed, ydth costs.  