
    Davis et al. v. Peel et al.
    
    July 8, 1895.
    Lumpldn, J., heard the argument, but declined to participate in deciding this case, because of relationship to one of the parties.
    
      J ohn A. Wimpy, for plaintiffs in error.
    
      George HiUyer, Porter King and G. A. Read, contra.
   Simmons, C. J.

Where the trial of a case in which two persons were plaintiffs, and a corporation and its creditors were defendants, resulted in a verdict and decree, giving to certain of the creditors special liens on the property of the corporation, and the plaintiffs made a motion for a new trial, to the overruling of which they excepted, but failed to serve with the bill of exceptions one of the parties who obtained a special lien by virtue of the verdict and decree, though that party was named in the bill of exceptions as a party defendant, a motion to dismiss the writ of error for want of service on such defendant will be sustained, he being an indispensable party.

Writ of error dismissed.  