
    Robertson et al. v. Peter Conrey.
    One who is sole stockholder of a bank, and the recipient of its assets,- is bound to pay a claim against the hank if the assets amount to the Sum claimed.
    APPEAL from the Fifth District Court of New Orleans, Buchanan, J.
    
    
      Thomas A. Clarke, ex parte, for the plaintiffs,
    contended: The Merchants’ Bank collected, as agent for the Bank of the United States, the sum of $360 for rent of a store for one yeai-, belonging to the latter. This receipt was not acknowledged or credited in the Mex-chants’ Bank account with the Bank of the United States. The defendant is sole stockholder of the Merchants’ Bank. The assets and papers are in his hands, and amount to a sufficient sum to meet the plaintiffs’ claim which is for $360, the said amount collected. Plaintiffs are assignees and trustees of the Bank of the United States. 1. The Merchants’ Bank would be compelled to pay us. 2. That if the first proposition is sustained, the defendant, the representative of said bank and possessor of its assets, must pay us out of the sum. 3 Mason Rep. 310.
   The judgment of the coui't was pronounced by

Slidell, J.

This cause has been submitted ex parte by the appellee, who relies on Wood v. Dremmert, 3 Mason, 310. The principles there recognised support the decree of the district judge.

The judgment is therefore affirmed, with costs.  