Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

4 Yeates 196

Welch v. Murray

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 15, 1805

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1805-03-15

A case was also filed for the opinion of the court, on a rule to bring into court, the money proceeding from the sale made by the sheriff. Held: that the priority of one could not be averred. Judgments are good by relation, though the defendant died before actual signing. Northern v. Olliver, 2 Barnes 265, (266, new edit.) Hall v. Morse, 2 Barnes 208, (267.) Savil v. Wilt-shire, lb, 212, (270.) Fawkes v. Atkinson, lb, 209, (268.) S. C Willes, 427.

Cited by 4 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 1805

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1805-03-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

By the Court.

¶1We feel no difficulty whatever in the determination of this case, hut we profess to decide only on the point now before us. The uniform uninterrupted practice in Pennsylvania for more than a century has been, to consider the binding effect of judgments upon lands, to take place only from the actual entry of the judgments. ■ Judgments thus entered, have never been supposed liable to he affected by fictions or relations. This custom has been used and approved since the first settlement of the province, and conduces to safety and security, As between conflicting judgment creditors, the well known rule applied to the truth of the fact as to the entry of the judgments, qui prior est tempore, potior est jure, must govern.

¶2Judgment in favour of Catharine Ewing.

/4/yeates/196 · .json · Public domain