DBLAWAEI! COAL A lOB CO. V. PAOKBB. 851 �of the creditors of the bankrupts. It is a mere accident that he and not another happens to be the assignee, who by virtue of his office must sue, and the rights of the estate he repre- sents cannot he aSected by his being personally estopped, as against this defendant, to deny that he was a member of the firm, if such is the fact. �The judgment in the state court was against Abendroth alone. It cannot, therefore, be said to be aconclusive deter- mination against Griffith & Wundrum, named as defend- ants in the summons and complaint, and against Abendroth, as being in privity with them. Nor eould a judgment by default against thetn operate as an estoppel against their Buccessor in interest, in a suit in another cause of action. "A judgment by default only admits, for the purpose of the action the legality of the demand or claim in suit ; it does not make the allegations of the declaration or complaint evidence in an action upon a different claim." Cromwell v. County of Sac, 9e U. S. 356. �It is unnecessary, therefore, to determine what effect as an estoppel the judgment in the state court might have against Abendroth in any possible proceedings between him individ- ually and this defendant, with reference to their rights aa 'creditors or debtors of this bankrupt estate, or to consider the other points raised and argued at the trial. �Judgment for plaintiff, with costs. ���Thb Delawarb Coal & Ice Company v. Paokeb. �{Circuit Court, B. Nev> Jersey. April 13, 1880.) �Patent — New CombinatioN of Otjd Blembuts — Omission of Clatw.— , A. distinct claim for each of the constituants of a new combination of �old elements will not protect such combination where there haa been �no specifie claim for the same. �Infringement of Patent. �F. Kingman, for complainant. �Judge Buchaiian, for defendant. ��� �
