
    SHOOK et al. v. DOZIER.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
    April 12, 1909.)
    No. 1,807.
    Afukat, and Error (§ 5) — Mode of Review — Intervention in Equity PROCEEDINGS.
    Where a judgment creditor of a street railway company, whose property was in the custody of a receiver, intervened to have the judgment paid out of the fund in the custody of the court in preference to the claims of the mortgagees, the intervention partools of the character of the original ease, and hence a determination was reviewable by appeal and not by a writ! of error.
    [ Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. § 8; Dec Dig. § 5.)
    In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Middle District of Tennessee.
    Robert F. Jackson, for plaintiffs in error.
    Before FURTON and SEVERKNS, Circuit Judges, and TAYFER, District Judge.
    
      
      For other cases seo same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & ltep'r Indexes
    
   FURTON, Circuit Judge.

This is a writ of error to review a judgment in favor of an intervener who had recovered a judgment against a street railway company whose property had passed to a successor consolidated company and was in the custody of a receiver appointed by the court below in a mortgage foreclosure"suit. The object of the intervention in the principal case was to have the judgment paid out of the fund in the custody of the court below in preference to the claims of mortgagees. The remedy was by appeal, and the writ of error must be dismissed. The case is governed by that of Nashville Railway & Light Co. v. Bunn et al. (opinion in which is handed down with this) 168 Fed. 862. It is so ordered.  