
    Edwin G. Moore, Appellant, v. Edmund L. Day, Respondent.
    
      Real property — easements —■ right of way —• when purchaser of land on island in lake has no right of way either by implied grant, by necessity or by prescription over shore lands of his grantor.
    
    
      Moore v. Ray, 199 App. Div. 76, affirmed.
    (Argued February 2, 1923;
    decided March 6, 1923.)
    Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered January 5, 1922, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court at a Trial Term without a jury and granting a new trial. The action was to establish a right of way over defendant’s land. Plaintiff’s predecessor in title purchased a tract of land on an island in Lake Champlain half a mile from the mainland. Defendant’s father from whom the purchase was made also owned the shore line opposite the island and for many years plaintiff and his predecessor were permitted to cross his land from the highway to the shore of the lake and to have boats there for the purpose of crossing to the island. Defendant succeeded to the shore land upon his father’s death and has prevented plaintiff from continuing to cross his land. There was no grant of any easement in the deed to plaintiff’s predecessor. Plaintiff claimed to be entitled to judgment upon the theories of implied grant and estoppel, by necessity and by prescription.
    
      Charles J. Vert for appellant.
    
      John J. Judge for respondent.
   Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered against appellant on the stipulation, with costs in all courts; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.  