
    No. 832.
    D. W. Grayson’s Exr. vs. E. E. Norton, Assignee. W. Bonner, Intervenor.
    Where the judgment debtor has gone into bankruptcy, the citation to revive the judgment must be served upon his assignee in bankruptcy, even though the assignee had filed his final account and had been discharged previous to the institution of the suit ior revival,
    Appeal from the District Court for Franklin. Smith, J.
    
      F. Garrett for' Plaintiff. Richardson & Boatner and Farmer for Intervenor.
    Grayson had recovered a judgment against one Sims which was recorded and operated a judicial mortgage upon his lands. After-wards Sims went into bankrupty, Norton being his assignee, and in duo time Sims had his discharge. The debt to Grayson was put on the schedule as an incumbrance on the land surrendered. The land was sold by public auction by Norton under order of the bankrupt court, and Bonner bought. Norton subsequently filed his final account as assignee and was discharged.
    Before the expiration of ten years from the date of the judgment this suit was brought for its revival against Norton as assignee, and citation was served on him. Bonner intervened, setting up his purchase, and alleging that the plaintiff had sued him to enforce the judicial mortgage, and should have sued Sims to revive the judgment, the recording of which created the mortgage. He maintained that he alone was interested in resisting the revival of the judgment, and that Norton could not stand in judgment because he had been discharged before the institution of this suit and no longer represented the bankrupt’s estate.
    The cause was heard in 1878 when the court held, Mare, J. rendering the opinion, that the citation for revival should have been addressed to and served upon Sims, and therefore the citation to Norton was without legal warrant and a judgment for revival could not be entered thereon. A rehearing was granted.
    In 1879, White, J., sitting vice Egan, J., deceased, the rehearing was had and the former decree set aside, and the court held that the citation was properly served upon the assignee, notwithstanding his discharge before suit filed.
   De Blanc, J.,

delivered the opinion, citing Kennedy v. Rust, 25 La. Ann. 554, and Alter v. Nelson, 27 La. Ann. 242; which wore adhered to because they had established a rule of practice. Marr, J., dissenting.  