The Federal Intermediate Credit Bank (D) sued Mitchell (P) for recovery on P's notes. P defended the action by pleading that in order to obtain loans from D he had to sell his crops through a grower's association and assign the proceeds as security for the notes and that D had received the proceeds and the notes had not been discounted. P did not counterclaim or ask for any relief. Judgment was rendered for P. P then sued for the proceeds kept by D in excess of the notes. The trial court ruled that P's action was barred on the theory that his affirmative claim was merged in the earlier judgment. P appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.