Hammons

A. T. Hammons, superintendent of banks of the state of Arizona and ex-officio receiver and in charge of the Bank of Winslow, an insolvent banking corporation of the state of Arizona, brought this action against these defendants residing in the state of California, for the purpose of enforcing and collecting their “double liability” as stockholders of' the Bank of Winslow. Before trial, the action was dismissed as to certain of the defendants. Defendants Brown, Moritz and Zwickey defaulted. Issue was joined by defendants Crozier, Smith, Tuttle and Ensign, and after trial the court entered a jugment that the plaintiff take nothing as against any answering defendant; and further, that the plaintiff take nothing as against any defaulting defendant. From this judgment the plaintiff has appealed upon the judgment-roll alone.

Appellant first urges in his opening brief that he is entitled to a judgment against the defáulting defendants. Whether or not this is so depends upon whether the complaint states a cause of action. (Swain, v. Burnette, 76 Cal. 299 [ 18 Pac. 394 ].) In his reply brief, appellant calls attention to the fact that the Supreme Court of Arizona, in the case of Dagg v.…