- i08 FEDEBAIi BEPOBTEB.
�Bbnbdict V. Williams and another.* {Circuit Court, S. D. New York. February 2, 1882.) �* Pkititt of Contkact— Assignee of Chose in Action. �Wliere defendants W. and K., citizens of different states, had entered into a couti-aot, by the terma of which the latter was to conduct certain litigation on behalf of the former, and to recoive part of the avails thereof for so uoing, and thereafter K. had entered into a contract with M. to assist in the conduct of such litigation for a share of Buch avails, with the knowledge of W., and M. had assigned his share of such avails to the orator, B., held, that there was suf- flcient privity of contract to maintain the suit agaipst K. as his trustee, and against W. as a debtor to his trustee for him. �2. Ekmotal of Cause — Distinctions bbtwbkn Lboal and Equitacle Pko- �CBDURB. �"Where an action commenced in a state court, in which the distinctions be- tween legal and equitable procedure are done hway with, is remored to a cir- cuit court of the United States, it is removed to that aide of the court where the appropriate relief, if due, can be obtained. �In Equity. On demurrer to bill. �William A. Beach, for plaintiff. �Edward M. Shepard, for defendant. �Wheeler, D. J. This cause has been heard on demurrer to the bill. It was commenced in the state court, and removed to this court. The bill shows that the defendant Williams, a citizen of Connecticut, made a contract with the defendant Kernochan, a citizen of Massa- chusetts, by the terms of which the latter was to conduct litigation in behalf of the former against the Kansas Pacific Eailway Company, as counsel, and to reoeive one-fourth part of avails thereof for so doing; that by a contract between Kernochan and Edwin E. Meade and Henry E. Knox the latter two were to assist in the conduct of the litigation, and to share equally with the former in the one-fourth part of the avails; that the litigation was conducted by them with the knowledge of Williams, and proceeded until the sum of |27,500 was received from it as the avails of it, by him; that Meade sold and assigned his share of these avails to the orator, a citizen of New York ; that Knox has been fully settled with, and that Meade's share has not been paid over. �The principal grounds of demurrer assigned are that there was no privity of contract between either Williams and Meade or Williams and the orator ; that Williams is only liable to Kernochan, who may be liable over to Meade or to the orator ; and that the orator's rem- edy, if he has auy, is at law. The want of privity relied upon, how- �*Reported by S. Nelson White, Esq., of the New York bar. ��� �
