pleading and practice between plaintiffs and defendants in similar cases. So the statute, in effect, declares. The rule is practicable and just; and it is supported by authority. Bank v. Weems, 69 Tex. 489, 6 S. W. Rep. 802. This was an action brought by stockholders of the City Bank of Houston to have it dissolved, and for the appointment of a receiver, and the distribution of its assets among its creditors and stockholders. The Continental National Bank of New York intervened in the action as creditor of the City Bank of Houston, claiming priority of payment. The receiver set up a claim of the City Bank against the Continental National Bank for paper sent by the former bank to the latter bank for discount, which the latter bank had refused to discount, but which it was collecting, appropriating the money to its own use. Judgment was rendered against the intervener bank, in favor of the receiver, upon this counterclaim, and on appeal this affirmative judgment was sustained, the court saying: “We are of opinion that, although this proceeding was an intervention in another suit, and was a mere outgrowth of the original action, yet, appellant (the intervener) having sought the jurisdiction of the court to establish equities against the estate in the hands of the receiver, it was proper to allow the latter to reconvene and set up all the rights of the insolvent corporation growing out of a continued course of dealing under one general agreement. It was not error for the court to adjust the equities between the two banks, and to state the amount, and give judgment for a balance found in favor of the insolvent bank.”
The order overruling the demurrer is reversed. All concur.
(56 N. W. Rep. 133.)
Note: See for other features of this ligation. Kae v. Eclipse, 30 N. W. Rep. 159. The Steamer Eclipse, 135 U. S. 590, S. C. 10S. C. Rep. 873.
