
    Bertha Rose et al., Appellants, v. The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company et al., Respondents.
    
      Negligence — nuisance — injury to customer of store from slipping on ice m front of store ■— complaint dismissed in action to recover on theories of nuisance and negligence.
    
    
      Rose v. Great Atlantic <£ Pacific Tea Co., 222 App. Div. 655, affirmed.
    (Argued April 12, 1928;
    decided May 8, 1928.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 6, 1927, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term in an action to recover for personal injuries and for loss of services and expense alleged to have been sustained by plaintiffs through the negligence 'of and maintenance of a nuisance by defendants. Plaintiff, while leaving the store of defendant tea company, slipped on ice which had accumulated in front of the door and fell, receiving injury.
    
      Frank I. Finkler for appellants.
    
      Charles H. O’Connor and Michael J. O’Neill for respondents.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cardozo, Ch. J., Pound, Crane, Andrews, Lehman, Kellogg and O’Brien, JJ.  