Case ID: miss_20/html/0486-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Clayton", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Grand Gulf Bank, use of Alfred Ingraham et al. vs. Johnson Jeffers et al.
    Where a suit was instituted in the name of a bank for the use of its assignees, by deed, of its choses in action, for the benefit.of creditors, upon one of the notes thus assigned, and afterwards a judgment of ouster was rendered against the bank, no revivor was necessary to continue the suit; the dissolution of the bank, like the death of a nominal plaintiff, did not under our statute abate the suit; but upon the suggestion of the bank’s dissolution, the suit should progress in the name of the assignees for whose benefit it was instituted.
    Where a suit was instituted in the name of a bank, for the use of its assignees, on one of the notes assigned, and by the deed of assignment, the property assigned vested in the assignees, or the survivor of them,, and judgment of ouster was afterwards rendered against the bank, the suit will continue, if one of the assignees be dead, in the name of the survivor.
    In error from the circuit court of Claiborne county; Hon. Stanhope Posey, judge.
    On the 14th of April, 1842, the Grand Gulf Bank, for the use of Alfred Ingraham and John Lindsey, sued John Jeffers and others upon their joint promissory note payable to the bank.
    The defendants pleaded, 1. non-assumpsit; 2. that the note sued on was assigned by the bank contrary to the provisions of the act of 1840, prohibiting assignments by banks. A replication was filed, admitting the assignment, but averring it was a general assignment for the benefit of the creditors of the Grand Gulf Bank, &c.
    The cause was continued from term to term until the 11th of April, 1848, when Alfred Ingraham and George Read suggested to the circuit court that they were assignees by deed of assignment, of all the choses in action of the bank, and suggested the dissolution of the bank, and prayed that the suit might be revived in the name of Ephraim A. McLean, William M. Randolph, and David M. Massie, the trustees appointed by the court in April, 1846, at the time of the dissolution of the bank, and at the time judgment of ouster was rendered against it; and that the suit might be prosecuted for their (Ingraham and Read’s) benefit.
    The defendants at the same time suggested the forfeiture of the charter and judgment of ouster, and prayed that the suit might be abated.
    The court ordered the suit to be abated; and Ingraham and Read filed a bill of exceptions, setting forth the above facts; and from this judgment Ingraham and Read prayed for a writ of error; but it was issued in the name of Ingraham, as surviving assignee.
    
      George S. Yerger and James IS. Maury, for plaintiffs in error.
    
      H. T. Ellett, for defendants in error.
    
      Montgomery and Boyd, on same side.
   Mr. Justice Clayton

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a suit in the name of the Grand Gulf Bank for the use of certain assignees, under a deed of general assignment, against the defendants in error. Under these circumstances no revivor was necessary.

The bank was only the nominal party, while Ingraham and Lindsey were the real parties of record. By our statute the death of the nominal plaintiff does not cause the suit to abate, but it afterwards proceeds in the name of the real plaintiff. The dissolution of the corporation has in this respect the same effect as the death of a natural person. It was error, therefore, in the court below, to have directed the abatement of the suit.

The judgment will be reversed, and the cause remanded to be proceeded in, in the name of the usees or their survivor; the assignment being to the two. or the survivor of them.

Judgment reversed.