Opinion
November, 1920.
Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and report of commissioners as to damage parcel No. 2 confirmed; and matter remitted to the Special Term with direction to pass upon the question of assessment for benefits. We think that there was no public easement (See Coleman v. City of New York, not reported), and that there was no sufficient proof to establish the existence of any private easement. Jenks, P.J., Rich, Putnam, Blackmar and Kelly, JJ., concur.