Cross-bill

That the cross bill may be broader than the original and seek relief on a Federal ground does not affect the question of the circuit court's jurisdiction, for a cross bill is a mere auxiliary or dependency of the original, and is entertained and disposed of in the exercise of the jurisdiction invoked by the latter.

A bill by a defendant to a biU in equity against the plaintiff or a codefendant for further relief in respect to the matters embraced in the suit. It is an auxiliary suit or dependency on the original suit. 35 N. H. 251.

One whir]! is brought by a defendant in a suit against a plaintiff in or against other defendants in the Bame suit, or against both, touching the matters in question in the original bill. Story, Eq. PI. § 389; Mitf. Eq. PI. SO. It is brought either to obtain a discovery of facts, in aid of the defence to the original bill, or to obtain full and complete relief as to the matters charged in the original bill; Ayers v. Carver, 17 How. (U. S.) 595, 15 L. Ed. l Tf). It is- considered as a defence to the original hill, and is treated as a dependency upon the original suit; 1 Eden, Inj. 190; 3 Atk. 312; 19 E. L. & Eq. 325; Cockrell v. Warner, 14 Ark. 346; Mc Dougald v. Dougherty, 14 Ga. 074; Slason v. Wright, 14 Vt. 208; Nelson v. Dunn, 15 Ala. 501; Kidder v. Barr. 35 N. H. 251. It is usually brought either to obtain a necessary discovery, as, for example, where the plaintiffs answer under oath is desired; 3 Swanst. 474; 3 Y. & C. 594; 2 Cox, Ch. 109; or to obtain full relief for all parties, since the defendant in a bill could originally only pray for a dismissal from court, which would not prevent subsequent suits; 1 Yes. 284; 2 Sch. & L. 9, 144; Speer v. Whitfield, 10 N. J. Eq. 107; Jones v. Smith, 14 111. 229; Bullock v. Brown, 20 Ga. 472; or where the defendants have conflicting interests; Pattison v. Hull, 9 Cow. (N. Y.) 747; Armstrong v. Pratt, 2 Wis. 299; but may not introduce new parties; Shields v. Barrow, 17 How. (U. S.) 130, 15 L. Ed. 158; unless affirmative relief is demanded and justice so requires; Brooks v. Applegate, 37 W. Va. 376, 16 S. E. 585. New parties cannot be brought in by a cross-bill; if the defendant's interest requires their presence, he should object for non-joinder and compel plaintiff to amend; Patton v. Marshall. 173 Fed. 350, 97 C. C. A. 610, 26 L. R. A. (N. S.) 127. It is also used for the same purpose as a plea puis darrein continuance at law; 2 Ball & B. 140; 2 Atk. 177, 553; Baker v. Whiting, 1 Sto. 218, Fed. Cas. No. 786. It should state the original bill, and the proceedings thereon, and the rights of the party exhibiting the bill which are necessary to be made the subject of a cross-litigation, on the grounds on which he resists the claims of the plaintiff in the original new and distinct matters; Gallatian y. Cunningham, 8 Cow. (N. Y.) 361. It should be brought before publication; Sterry v. Arden, 1 John-. Ch* < N. Y. Josey v. Rogers, 13 Ga. 47>>; and not after, — to avoid perjury; Field v. in, 7 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 250; Nelson 103. In England it need not be i the same court; Mitf. Eq. PL 81. For the rule in the United States, see Carnochan v. Christie, 11 Wheat. (U. S. ) 446, 6 L. 516; Story, Eq. PI. § 401; Dan. Ch. PI. & Pr. L549. The granting or refusing permission to file a cross-hill is largely in the disc* of the court; Huff v. Bidwell, 151 Fed. 563, 81 C. C. A. 43. T'mler the Equity Rules of Supreme Court of United States (Feb. 1, 1913), matter er for a cross hill may be set up in the answer, with the same effect Rule 30 (33 Sup. Ct. xxvi i.

Inequity practice, One which is brought by a defendant in a suit against a plaintiff in or against other defendants in the same suit, or against both, touching the matters in question in the original bill. Story, Eq. P}. § 389; Mitf. Eq. Pl. 80. A eross-bill is a bill brought by a defendant against a plaintiff, or other parties in a former bill depending, touching the matter in question in that bill. It is usually brought either to obtain a necessary discovery of facts in aid of the defense to the original bill, or to obtain full relief to all par ties in reference to the matters of the original bill It is to be treated as a mere auxiliary suit 17 How. 591; 35 N. H. 235. A eross-bill is a species of pleading, used for the purpose of obtaining a discovery necessary to the defense, or to obtain some relief founded on the collateral claims of the party defendant to the original suit. 14 Ga. 167. Also, if a bill of exchange or promissory note be given in consideration of another bill or note, it is called a “eross” or “counter” bill or note. lief agalast any party, relating to or depending upon the contract or transaction upon which the action is bronght, or affecting the property to which the action relates, he may, in addition to his answer, file at the same time, or by permission of the court subsequenily, a eross-complaint, The cross-complaint must be served upon the parties affected thereby, and such parties may demur or answer thereto as to the originalcomplainl. Code Civil Proc. Cal. § 442.

In equity pleading. A bill filed by a defendant in a suit in equity, against the plaintiff or complainant, in order to obtain some relief against him. 3 Bl. Com. 448. A defendant cannot pray any thing in his answer but to be dismissed the court; if he has any relief to pray against the plaintiff he must do it by an original bill of his own, which is called a cross bill. Id. ibid. A cross bill is a bill brought by a defendant against a plaintiff or other parties in a former bill depending, touching the matter in question in that bill. Mitford's Eq. Pl. 80, 81, (98, and note, Moulton's ed. 1849.) It is treated as a mere auxiliary suit, or as a dependency upon the original suit. Story's Eq. Pl. § 399. It is generally considered and used as a matter of defence; the original and the cross bill constituting but one cause. 7 Johns. Ch. 250, 252. A cross bill answers to the re-conventio of the civil law. Gilb. Forum Rom. ch. 4.