Foreclosure suits. All persons having an interest, legal or equitable, existing at the commencement of a suit to foreclose mort gaged premises, must be made parties, or they will not be bound; Tiedem. Eq. Jur. § 441 ;- Ensworth v. Lambert, 4 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 605 ; Huggins v. Hall, 10 Ala. 283 ; Matcalm v. Smith, 6 McLean, 416, Fed. Cas. No. 9,272; Hall v. Hall, 11 Tex. 526; includ ing the mortgagor within a year after the sale of his interest by the sheriff ; Ballock v. Smith, 4 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 649; and his heirs and personal representative after his death ; Worthington v. Lee, 2 Bland (Md.) 684. But bond-holders for whose benefit a mortgage has been made by a corporation to a trustee need not be made parties; Shaw v. R. Co., 5 Gray (Mass.) 162; Jones, Corp. Bonds & Mortg. § 398. A person claiming ad versely to mortgagor and mortgagee cannot be made a defendant to such suit ; Banks v. Walker, 3 Barb. Ch. (N. Y.) 438.
Heirs, distributees, and devisees. All the heirs should be made parties to a bill re specting the real estate of the testator ; Mer sereau v. Ryerss, 3 N. Y. 261; Kennedy's Heirs & Ex'rs v. Kennedy's Heirs, 2 Ala. 571; Duncan v. Wickliffe, 4 Scam. (111.) 452; although the testator was one of several mortgagees of the vendee, and the bill be brought to enforce the vendor's lien; Thorn ton v. Knox's Ex'r, 6 B. Monr. (Ky.) 74 ; but need not to a bill affecting personalty ; Galphin v. McKinney, 1 McCord, Ch. (S. C.) 280. Where, in a suit to set aside a deed for fraud, one of the heirs did not join as plaintiff, he may be made a party defend ant, even if he should elect to affirm the deed; Billings v. Mann, 156 Mass. 203, 30 N. E. 1136. All the devisees are necessary par ties to a bill to set aside the will ; Vancleave v. Beam, 2 Dana (Ky.) 155; or to enjoin executors from selling lands belonging to the testator's estate; Lee v. Marshall's Devisees, 2 T. B. Monr. (Ky.) 30. All the distributees are necessary parties to a bill for distribu tion ; Hawkins' Adm'r v. Craig, 1 B. Monr. (Ky.) 27; to a bill by the widow of the in testate against the administrator to recover her share of the estate; Chinn v. Caldwell, 4 Bibb (Ky.) 543; and to a bill against an administrator to charge the estate with an annual payment to preserve the residue: Cabeen v. Gordon, 1 Hill, Ch. (S. C.) 51. See, also, Smith v. Wyckoff, 11 Paige (N. Y.)
49; Slaughter v. Froman, 2 T. B. Monr. (Ky.) 95. A bill cannot be filed against the heirs and devisees jointly for satisfaction of a debt of the deceased; Schermerhorn v. Barhydt, 9 Paige (N. Y.) 28.
Idiots and lunatics should be joined with their committees when their interests con flict and must be settled in the suit ; Bras her's Ex'rs v. Van Cortlandt, 2 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 242; Teal v. Woodworth, 3 Paige (N. Y.) 470.
Partners must, in general, be all joined in a bill for dissolution of the partnership; but need not if without the jurisdiction; Lind.
Part. 460; Wickliffe v. Eve, 17 How. (U. S.) 468, 15 L. Ed. 163; Towle v. Pierce, 12 Metc. (Mass.) 329, 46 Am. Dec. 679.
Assignees of insolvent partners must be joined ; Pearce v. Norton, 10 Me. 255.
Dormant partners need not be joined when not known in the transaction on which the bill is founded ; Goble v. Gale, 7 Blackf. (Ind.) 218, 41 Am. Dec. 219.
Principal and agent should be joined if there be a charge of fraud in which the agent participated; Veazie v. Williams, 3 Sto. 611, Fed. Cas. No. 16,907 ; and the agent should be joined where he binds himself in dividually ; McAlexander v. Lee, 3 A. K. Marsh. (Ky.) 484.
Trustee and cestui que trust. If a trustee has parted with the trust fund, the cestui que trust may proceed against the trustee alone to compel satisfaction, or the frauclii lent assignee may be joined with him at the election of the complainant; Bailey v. Inglee, 2 Paige (N. Y.) 278. Where a claimant against the estate of a deceased person .seeks to follow the assets into the hands of a trus tee, it is not necessary to make the beneficia ries parties ; 45 Ch. Div. 444.
On a proceeding in equity for the appoint ment of trustees under a mortgage, where two of the three trustees have died, and there is no provision in the mortgage for filling the vacancies, the mortgagor and the surviving trustee are necessary parties; In re Inhabitants of Anson, 85 Me. 79, 26 Atl. 996.
The trustees under a settlement of real estate, against whom a trust or power given to them to sell the estate is to be enforced, are necessary parties to a Suit for that pur pose; 39 E. L. & Eq. 76. See, Phipps v. Tarpley, 24 Miss. 597; McRea v. Bank, 19 How. (U. S.) 376, 15 L. Ed. 688; Jamison v. Chesnut, 8 Md. 34.