Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/457

 DONOHOE V. KOBEliXS. 449 �right of redemption to expire, and therefore the plaintifif took nothing by the deed executed May 12, 1871. �Judgment will be entered in favor of the defendants. ���DoNOHUB and othera v. Eobbets and others, �(Circuit Court, E. B. Mmouri. March 13, 1880.) �Account — Joindbb of Administratob and Subetibs m thb Same Suit— Pay>'e v. Hook, 7 Wall. 425 ; 14 Wali.. 252, PoltjOWBD. — An administrator and liis sureties may be joiiiRd in a suit against theadmin- istrator for an account and settlemeut, and for judgnient against the Buretics for the balance found due upon the settlement of such account. �AdMINISTKATOI! — SUKETIES — FHAUDULENT AND COLLUSIVB CLAIM. — It �cannot be determined upon demurrer whetlier such sureties are liable for tlje allpged fraud and collusion of the administrator in the proof and allowance of his own indiviJual claim against the estate of his intestate. �In Equity. Demurrer to complaint. �Lucien Eaton, for complainants. �Louifi Houck, for respondents. �McCkary, J., (orally.) This case was Bubmitted upon a demurrer to the complainants' bill. The Mil is brought by the heirs of Mrs. Eoberts, against her administrator and his sureties, charging fraud in the settlement of the aecounts of the estate, and seeking to have a settlement of the amount due from the administrator, and to recover the same as against him and his sureties. The demurrer raises the question ■whether the two can be joined in one action — that is, a suit against the administrator to settle his aecounts and to re- cover the balance, and at the same time against his sureties to obtain judgment against them for whatever balance may be ascertained. That question bas been fnlly settled by a case which went up from this court and waa twice considered by the supreme court of the United States. Payne v. Hook, 7 Wall. 425; 14 Wall. 252, where the same question was fuUy eonsidered, and the right to join the administration and his �vl,no.7— 29 ��� �