|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COOMBS v. JORDAN 325
which, recording is accessary, the recording of them, after the
time prescribed, is not allowed to affect, by relation, the rights and
interests of intervening purchasers or creditors, (x)
Such is the nature and continuance of the lien upon real estate
arising from a judgment And, upon similar principles, as a judg-
ment does not, of itself, give rise to any lien upon personal pro-
perty; and as the lien upon it can only commence, according to the
statute of frauds, from the day of the actual delivery of fieri facias
into the hands of the sheriff, so it continues no longer, by virtue
thereof, upon such property than it may be levied upon by such
writ of fieri facias; that is, until its return day; after which, if it
can be so continued at all, it can only be by the immediate re-
newal of such execution, or the instant delivery of another fieri
facias to the sheriff, (y)
But if a judgment be given on a writ of annuity the plaintiff
shall have execution, within the year, after every day of payment,
though it be many years after the judgment, (z) And so, if the
terms of the judgment suspends for a time the issuing of execu-
tion; or the execution be stayed by an appeal, or writ of error ;
or the issuing of an execution be prohibited by an injunction, an
execution may be issued at any time, within the time allowed,
after the expiration of such suspension or stay, or after the disso-
lution of the injunction; and consequently, the judicial Hen, in all
such cases, is so far continued, (a)
The presumption of satisfaction may however be repelled, and
the lien sustained in full force by the issuing of an execution, and
continuing to re-issue an execution within the time allowed by
law after the return of each execution, for any length of time, (b)
And so too, where there was a judgment rendered in May, 1787,
by virtue of which a lien then fastened upon the land of the defen-
dant; and another judgment rendered in November, 1791, under
which that land was regularly taken in execution and sold; and
the purchaser who was, in 1796, summoned and appeared to a
scire facias on the judgment of 1787, as terre-tenant, without
(z) 1785, ch. 72, s. 11; 1831, ch. 304; Pannell v. The Farmers Bank, 7 H. & J.
202.—(y) Oades v. Woodward, 1 Salk. 87; Heapy v. Parris, 6 T. R. 368; Williams
9. Bradley, 2 Hayw. 363.—(z) 2 Inst. 471.—(a) 2 Inst 471; Blacklock v. Mad-
dox, 2 Harr, Ent. 694; 1799, ch. 79, s. 10; 1826, ch. 157; Underhill v. Devereux,
2 Saund. 72, c. note; Michell v. Cue, 2 Burr, 600; Franklin v. Thomas, 3 Meriv.
234.—(b) 2 Inst. 471; Bac. Abr. tit. Scire Facias, C. 1; Bing. Execu. 161; Cooke
9. Batthurst, 2 Show. 235; Mullikin v. Duvall, 7 G. & J. 355.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
