
    SCOTT v. LAZELL et al.
    (Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
    January 28, 1910.)
    Equity (§ 300) — Pleading—Defenses to Supplemental Bill.
    Defenses which 'have been considered on an original bill cannot be again set up by the same defendants in an answer to a supplementary bill.
    [Ed. Note. — -For other cases, see Equity, Cent. Dig. § 592-; Dee. Dig. § 300.*]
    In Equity. Suit by Charles H. Scott against Bessie Lazell, Agnes B. Cronin, the Grommet Manufacturing Company, and Isaac Marks. On exceptions to answer to supplementary bill.
    Exceptions sustained.
    See, also, 170 Red. 1023.
    MacDonald & MacDonald, for complainant.
    Grafton L. McGill, for defendants.
    
      
      For other oases see same topic & § nvmeek in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   HAZEL, District Judge.

The exceptions filed by complainant to the answer interposed to the supplementary bill are allowed. The objectionable matter in paragraphs 8, 9, and 10 of the answer must be expunged. Defendants apparently have had their day in court (Scott v. Dazell, 160 Fed. 472, 87 C. C. A. 456) on the various defenses to which exceptions are filed.

As to whether the defendant Marks and the corporation were privies to the former judgment are questions of fact, which are not now before the court for decision.

So ordered.  