
    Meyersdale Borough, Appellant, v. Deal.
    
      Equity — ■Findings of fact — Obstruction of alley — Evidence.
    On a bill in equity filed by a borough against an owner of a lot to enjoin the obstruction of an alleged public alley, a finding of fact by the court below based upon sufficient evidence that the alley had never been dedicated to the public, or opened, and was not a public alley, will not be reversed by the appellate court in the absence of manifest error.
    Argued May 5, 1909.
    Appeal, No. 210, April T., 1908, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. Somerset Co., No. 11, Equity Docket, 1906, dismissing bill in equity in case of Meyersdale Borough v. C. E. Deal.
    Before Rice, P. J., Porter, Henderson, Morrison, Orlady, Head and Beaver, JJ.
    Affirmed.
    Bill in equity to restrain the obstruction of an alleged public alley. Before Kooser, P. J.
    The case turned on the question whether an alley known as “ Land Line Alley” was or was not a public alley.
    The court found as a fact in a lengthy opinion that the alley was not a public alley. The court dismissed the bill.
    
      Errors assigned were in overruling exceptions to various findings and in dismissing the bill.
    
      
      Geo. K. Warn and J. A. Berkey, for appellant.
    
      A.L.G. Hay, with him Valentine Hay, for appellee.
    July 14, 1909:
   Opinion by

Morrison, J.,

This was a bill in equity and a careful examination of the bill and answer, testimony, findings of fact, exceptions, discussion and conclusions of law by the learned Judge below convinces us that he gave the parties a careful hearing and reached a just and equitable conclusion. We are all of the opinion that the decree ought to be affirmed and, therefore, we do not think a discussion and opinion from us would be profitable.

The assignments of error are all overruled, the decree is affirmed, and the appeal is dismissed at the costs of the appellant.  