
    DORLAND v. FIDELITY DEVELOPMENT CO. et al. (ROBIN, Intervener).
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    February 13, 1914.)
    Appeal and Error (§ 91*)—Right to Appeal.
    An order granting a motion for leave to intervene as a defendant will be affirmed on appeal, if the order does not affect a substantial right of the defendants appealing therefrom.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 612-641; Dec. Dig. § 91.*]
    Appeal from Special Term, New York County.
    Action by Louise M. Borland, a creditor, on behalf of herself, against the Fidelity Development Company, impleaded with others. From an order granting a motion of Joseph G. Robin for leave to intervene, the Development Company and others appeal.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J., and McLAUGHLIN, LAUGH-LIN, CLARKE, and SCOTT, JJ..
    Robert McC. Marsh, of New York City, for appellants.
    Robert D. Ireland, of New York City, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The order appealed from is affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements, upon the ground that the order granted does not affect a substantial right of the appellants.  