HAYDEN VS. STEWART. 465,

My opinion, therefore, is, upon this question, that a judg-
ment rendered in any one of the county courts in this state, is
not alien upon lands lying in another, until the plaintiff, in the
mode pointed out in the Acts of Assembly referred to, has
transferred his judgment to such other county; and that, con-
sequently, the bank in this case has no such lien upon the fund
in question as can interfere with the right of the assignee,
Heighe, to the proceeds of the bond now in court.

It is said, however, that the assignee has not stated, in his
answer to the petition, how much he paid or advanced for the
bond, and that it may be he gave a very inadequate sum for it.
The answer, however, will be found to be strictly responsive
to the allegation of the petition in this respect. The averment
is, that the transfer was not made bona fide, and for a valuable
consideration, without notice; in response to which, Heighe
says, he purchased the bond bona fide, and for a valuable con-
sideration, without notice of any fact or circumstance which
could in any way invalidate his right to the money. The as-
signee was not called upon to disclose the amount which he
paid as the consideration of the assignment, and, therefore, a
general denial of the allegation that he was not a purchaser for
value, and without notice, must be sufficient.

An order will therefore be passed, directing the proceeds of
this particular note to be paid to the assignee, Heighe, and for
the dismissal of the petitions as to him.

It does not follow, however, that the petitions of the bank
are to be dismissed as against Stewart. There still remains a
considerable sum due Stewart, and I am by no means prepared
to say that the bank, as against him, has not shown its right to
have such residue appropriated to pay its judgments. The
money, assuming it not to have been paid over, is still under
the control of the court, and the petitions make out a case, in
which, if they do not establish a lien, they show the creditor to
be remediless at law, which brings the case within the decision
of the Court of Appeals in Clagett, Jidm'r of Beares vs.
Worthington, 3 Gill, 84.