Page:United States Reports, Volume 209.djvu/272

 OCTOBER TERM, 1907. Opinion of the Court. HUTCHINS v. MUNN. APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. No. 16. Ared March 10. l,--Deeidsd  2, The megmlre of protection to he given by the undertaking requir iuing a rastralning order uader t 718, Rev. Star., is to make good the injuries inflicted upon a party o]erving the order until it is dimotved, and such undertaking inures to the benefit of a defendt suffedug injuries lrrpeetive of th emlct time when t.t party has knowled of the pendency of the action or appears therein; nor is this protect/on denied because the only defendant sustalnin iniur/es is a woman and the tmdertak/ng is to make  "to the ddendant all d*m by him suffered." Findin of an aud/tor ng damas on an vndertaldn should not be set aside by the court unless there h been an error of htw or a con- cludon of fact unwarranted by the ev/dence. The owner of a house in Washington, D.C., who was prevented by ir order from completing alterations during the w/nter months, the house meanwhile ! eing only partially habitable, was held, in this case, to have lost the entire ue of the house and to be entitled to recover on the undertakin the reasonable rental value of the house for the season. 8 App. O. C. 27L THE facts are stated in the opinion. Mr. Eden C. Br, th whom Mr. C/ren A. B/menrg and Mr. F. Wller Br/erg were on the brief, for appellants. Mr. Samuel Maddox, qth whom Mr. H. Prescott Gatley'was on the brief, for appellee. MR. JVSTICE MooDY delivered the opinion of the court. This is an appeal from a judg'ment of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia. The appellee Carrie L. Munn was

�