
    Wright vs. Damish.
    This being a suit by preferred creditors against the assignee of their debtors, and it being the desire of the assignee that, if judgment should be rendered against him, it should protect him and his assignor from suit on the note held by the creditors, and that provision should be made for payment of the judgment out of the fund in his hands as assignee, the judgment is affirmed, with directions that it be so amended as to cancel the note given by the debtor to the creditors, and so as to require the payment of the same out of the assets in the hands of the assignee; and it is ordered that the costs of this writ of error also be paid by the defendant out of the fund in his hands as assignee.
    Judgment affirmed with directions.
    March 10, 1885.
   Hall, Justice.

[Whifctendale made an assignment to Wright, for the benefit of creditors, giving certain preferences. Among the preferred debts was anote for $2,000 held by Damish, on which suit was brought. The assignee had made payments on the note, reducing it to ,$1,216.20. Damish brought suit against the assignee for that amount as money had and received by the assignees for plaintiff’s use. Wright set up these facts in his defence, and that he had received notice from Whittendale to defend the suit on the note, as it was claimed that nothing was due thereon. The case was submitted to the court, without a jury, on an agreed statement of facts. He rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff “ against the defendant, Stephen B. Wright, as assignee of Christopher Whittendale,” for the principal sued for, with interest thereon. Defendant excepted.]  