
    BOYD v. STUTTGART & A. R. R. R. et al.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    December 8, 1897.)
    No. 851.
    Appear— Service op Citation — Dismissal.
    An appeal presenting a question whether a judgment creditor of a railroad company or the trustee of its mortgage bondholders is entitled to priority of lien must be dismissed on motion of Sie trustee, when no citation has been addressed to or served upon it.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
    This was a suit in equity by J. A. Boyd against the Stuttgart & Arkansas River Railroad and another, seeking to recover a decree for money advanced and services rendered, and to Rave the same declared a lien upon the railroad property. The defendant filed an answer, but shortly afterwards a receiver of its property was appointed, on the application of the mortgage bondholders, with an independent suit, and the receiver was permitted to defend the action. The suit resulted in a decree adjudging that complainant recover the sum of $12,627.48, with interest and cost, but that the said sum did not constitute a lien on the railroad property and franchises. From this decree, the present appeal was taken.
    P., C. Dooley and Ewan, Manning & Lee, for appellant.
    John McClure, for appellees. ,
    Before SANBORN and THAYER, Circuit Judges, and PHILIPS, District Judge.
   PER CURIAM.

The question upon the merits in this case is whether J. A. Boyd, a judgment creditor of the Stuttgart & Arkansas River Railroad Company, or the Farmers’ Loan & Trust Company, the trustee for Certain bondholders secured by a mortgage made by. that company, is entitled to the superior lien upon its franchises and property. No citation was addressed to or served upon the trust Company, and upon that ground it has appeared, and made a motion to dismiss the appeal. The motion is granted upon the authority of Trust Co. v. McClure, 49 U. S. App. 43, 24 C. C. A. 64, and 78 Fed. 209; Dodson v. Fletcher, 49 U. S. App. 61, 24 C. C. A. 69, and 78 Fed. 214; and Trust Co. v. Clark, 83 Fed. 230.  