|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COOMBS v. JORDAN.
than no direct legislative enactment upon the subject; and no cast
is recollected in which the point has been decided by the Court of
Appeals.
But U has been declared by an act of Assembly, that fit shall
and may be lawful for the Chancellor to issue attachment of con-
tempt, attachment with proclamations, and also sequestration
against the defendant, until the decree shall be fully performedf
fulfilled and executed, and the contempts cleared, or to order pro*
cess of sequestration to issue to compel a performance of the said
decree, by an immediate sequestration of the real and personal
estate and effects of the defendant, or such part thereof as may be
sufficient to satisfy the demand of the plaintiff in the decree speci-
fied and decreed, and to clear the contempts; or to issue fieri
facias against the lands, tenements and hereditaments, goods and
chattels of the defendant or defendants, upon which sufficient pro-
perty shall be taken and sold to satisfy the demand of the plaintiff
in the decree specified, (k) or a capias ad satisfaciendum may be
issued against the defendant or defendants by the Chancellor, upon
which there shall be the same proceeding as at law.'
By this act, as by the English statute giving the elegit, an elec-
tion has been given to the party, immediately on obtaining a de-
cree, not merely to sue out the old personal process or to hare
an execution directing the half of the defendant's lands to be deli-
vered to him at an extended value; but to have the former process,
or a fieri facias, by which the whole of the defendant's lands may
be taken in execution and sold to satisfy the demand of the plain-
tiff. Whence it necessarily follows, that as lands have been thus
made liable to be taken in execution and sold to satisfy a decree,
and by the same process as to satisfy a judgment at common law,
a decree must, in like manner, give rise to a lien which will bind
the land of the defendant. (I)
At common law a plaintiff may, at once, sue out a capias ad
satisfaciendum and a fieri facias upon his judgment, and have
recourse to the one or the other at his election, so that they be not
both of them executed at the same time, (m) But, as from the
complex nature of some decrees, requiring certain acts to be per-
formed as well as the payment of money, a fieri facias cannot, in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(k) 1785, ch. 72, s. 25.—(l) Bligh v. Darnley, 2 P. Will. 622; Forum Rom. 87.—
(in) Miller v. Parnell, 1 Com. Law Rep. 414, Primrose v. Gibson, 16 Com. Law
Rep, 78.
41 v.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
