Brooks v. Martin

delivered the opinion of the court.

The only question presented by this appeal is as to the action of the court below in sustaining Martin’s demurrer to the cross-bill of the appellant, and that was correct, because the cross-bill does not contain any cause of action. It shows that the appellant apprehends that he may at a future day have a cause of action against Martin, but it is not allowable to make that the foundation of a present suit. If the appellant had the right to maintain an original bill against Martin by reason of the matters embraced in' this litigation, he might maintain a cross-bill, but, as stated, it does not appear that he had any right of action when he exhibited his cross-bill.

Decree affirmed.