
    BASSELIN et al., Appellants, v. LEHMAN, Respondent.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
    May 8, 1907.)
    Action by Theodore B. Basselin and another against. John Lehman.
   PER CURIAM.

The defendant’s attorney having expressly stated in open court that the defendant would consent to maintain the boom in question with an opening at least 20 feet in width, and not as a closed boom, the order appealed from is reversed, without costs of this appeal to either party, and injunction granted restraining the defendant, during the pendency of this action, from maintaining the boom in question as a closed boom, and from maintaining the same with an opening less than 20 feet in width, upon plaintiffs giving a bond in the usual form in the penalty of $5,000, to be approved as to form and sufficiency of sureties by a justice of the Supreme Court. Order to be settled by and before Mr. Justice Williams on one day’s notice.

SPRING and KRUSE, JJ., dissent.  