Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 Miles 271

Bryan v. Comly

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County · decided 1838-11-10

<p>JUDGMENT in this case was obtained on the 25th day of September, 1838, for want of an affidavit of defence. October 3, 1838, the plaintiff purchased a writ of error, and bail was regularly entered. October 19, 1838, the writ of error was lodged in the office of the prothonotary of this court before 12 o’clock, M., but no notice thereof was given to plaintiff, who, about 3 o’clock of same day, issued a fieri facias and capias ad satisfaciendum. The defendant obtained this rule to show cause why the fieri facias and capias ad satisfaciendum should not be set aside.</p> <p>said, 1. That by the acts of 11th March, 1809, 11th March, 1834, and 16th June, 1836, this writ of error was no supersedeas, having issued more than three weeks after the date of the judgment. (Stroud’s Purd. lit. Errors and Appeals, and Executions.) 2. The defendant should have given notice to plaintiff of the writ of error.</p>

Relies on Mann v. Alberti

Decided 1838-11-10

Per Curiam.—

¶1The act of 1809, extends only to cases of judgments on special verdicts, demurrers, and cases stated. The acts of 1834 and 1836 do not alter the law, that a writ of error, on which bail has been duly entered and served at any time before execution issued, or if issued, before it is executed, (which, *272in the case of a fieri facias, is so considered if levied,) prevents execution. The limit as to time is prescribed by the act of 1791, which is seven years, with certain exceptions in favour of minors, &c. An analogous rule is found in the case determined on the act relating to justices of the peace, by which bail for stay of execution may be entered more than twenty days after judgment, and it will prevent the issuing of an execution. (Man v. Alberti, 2 Binn. 195.)

¶2The acts referred to simply provide, that the writ, if issued within three weeks from the day of the judgment, shall be a super-sedeas, although an execution within that time may have been issued and executed. It is not necessary that the plaintiff in error should give notice to the opposite party of his writ. 5 Taunt. 204; Tidd 1172; Bingham on Ex. 265; 17 Johns. R. 74; 2 Harr. & Johns. 7.

¶3Rule absolute.

/2/miles/271 · .json · Public domain