Henderson v. . Wallace .Henderson v. . Wallace .
- Reporters:
- Before:
- Rodman
It seems clear that as Jane McCoombs was not a party to the bill in equity for the partition’ of the lands-through a sale, she was in no ways affected by any decree or proceedings in it, and that therefore she is net at liberty to-bring an action in the nature of a bill of review, to vacate the decree. Her estate in the lands remains as it was before any decree for sale. She stills owns one-seventh of the lands, and may enter into possession along with her co-tenants, or have-any process which a co-tenant is entitled to, for partition..
Probably also the Court, on her motion, would allow the-original bill for partition to be amended by making her a’ party. What the effect of such an amendment might be on her interests, we are not called on to say.
The present action cannot be maintained.
Per Curiam. Action dismissed.