Meyberg & Wangelin v. Steagall & Co.

Citations

• 51 Tex. 351

Syllabus

<p>1. Intervenor.—The right to intervene for the recovery of damages in an attachment suit, is limited to those who have an interest in the subject-matter of- the original suit.</p> <p>2. Intervention—Attachment —Partnership —Injunction.— Suit was brought, by attachment, by B against O and D, as partners, on a note executed by them for a partnership debt before M, a new partner, was admitted into the firm. The business continued to be conducted after M’s connection with the firm under the old firm name. M intervened in the suit, alleging liis partnership and half interest in the stock of goods attached, and joined C and D in a claim for damages for wrongfully suing out the attachment: Held—</p> <p>1. That M had no such interest in the subject-matter of the suit as would authorize his intervention for the recovery of damages.</p> <p>2. The levy of a valid attachment in a proper manner on the partnership property of O and D was not wrongful, though if it should appear that, on a settlement, of the partnership business, the prior claims of M and the creditors of the firm would absorb the entire interest of C and D, and leave nothing subject, to levy, the enforcement of the attachment would in a proper proceeding be enjoined.</p> <p>3. The above is held, without deciding whether a third party whose property is wrongfully attached as that of another may intervene for the purpose of recovery.</p>