Gayoso Savings Institution v. Burrow

Citations

• 37 Tex. 88

Syllabus

<p>1. Non-resident creditors of a non-resident banking corporation attached lands in this State as the property of the corporation. An intervenor alleged that, previous to the levy and to the issuance of the attachment, the corporation had failed and had forfeited its franchise, and that he, by a decree of a Chancery court of the State wherein the corporation was located, had been appointed receiver for the corporation; and that the title to the lands attached had, previous to the attachment, been conveyed to him for the benefit of the general creditors of the corporation. The plaintiffs moved that the intervention be dismissed, on the ground that the intervenor had no interest in the suit, and no right to defend the same. Held, that it was error to sustain the motion and preclude the intervenor from defending the action.</p> <p>‘,2. At the instance of non-resident plaintiffs, an attachment was issued and levied on land in this State alleged to be the property of a non-resident corporation, the defendant; but the writ of attachment was quashed on account of defects in the attachment bond. Held, that when the attachment was quashed the suit should have abated.</p>