596 JEDBBali BBPOaTBB. �HiBERNiA Ins. Go. v. St. Louis & New Oblbans Tbansp. Co.* �(Circuit Court, E. D. Missouri. March 9, 1882.) 1. CoBPOHATioNs— Fbauddlent Asbignment of Asbets— Subhogatiok — Plbad- �INGS— PaKTIHS. �Where A., an insurance company, brought its bill in equity against B., C, and D., and alleged that B. was a transportation company, and had, by differ- ent coutracts of affreightnient with difiEerent shippers, undertaken to transport certain merchandise, insured by A., to a apecifled point ; that said merchandise was shipped at different times on different barges ; that the same was damaged or lest through B.'a negligence under different circumstances ; that A., as insurer, paid the amount of the respective losses, and became subrogated to the rights of the shippers againat B.; that after aaid cause of action accrued B., fraudulently and without consideration, tranaferred to C, another corpo- ration, all its assets, and that C. took the same with notice of A. 's demand; and that D. was the president of and principal stockholder in, and caused said transfer to be made ; and where the prayer of the bill was for a decree as for a moneyed judgment against the defendants ; also to charge the property trans- ferred, as aforesaid, with a lien in A. 's favor thereon, — hdd, (1) that D. was not a proper party ; (2) that the bill was not raultifarious ; (3) that the allegations of the bill were sufflcient to hold B. and C. to answer ; and (4) that nnder the facts stated, C. was aaswerable to A. to the extent of the property received by it from B. �Demurrer to the Bill. �The defendants demurred to the bill in this case upon the follow- ing grounds, viz. : �(1) Because it contains no matter of equity whereon thia court can ground any decree or give oomplainant any relief as against defendants. (2) Be- cause said bill does not show any privity between the plalntifl and defendants which would entitle it to call upon these defendants to account to it in this court. (3) Because said bill of complainant is multifarious, in that it unites in the same bill several matters and causes in which none of these defendants have any united or common interest, and in which no two of said defendants have any interest. (4) Because, on the face of said bill, it is apparent that this complainant has no right to institute this suit in this court, or to aak the relief requested. �The averments of the bill are sufficiently set forth in the opinion of the court. The parties defendant are the St. Louis & New Orleans Transportation Company, the Babbage Transportation Company, and Samuel Lowery. �0. B. Sansum and George H. Shields, for plaintiff. �Given Campbell and Thomas J. Partis, for defendants. �*Reported by B. F. Rex, Esq., of the St. Louis bar. ��� �
