264 ASSIGNMENT OF CHOSES IN ACTION. [ART. 8

due thereon, whether the whole be due or part has been pre-
viously paid, shall be entitled to an assignment thereof; and
may, by virtue of such assignment, maintain an action in his
own name against the principal debtor.

Norwood v. Norwood, 2 H. & J. 238. Sotheren v. Reed, 4 H. & J. 307.
Ghiselin v. Ferguson, 4 H. & J. 522. Creager v. Brengle, 5 H. & J. 234.
Merryman v. State, 5 H. & J. 426. Hollingsworth v. Floyd, 2 H. & a. 91.
Williamson v. Allen, 2 G. & J. 344. Colegate r. Fredericktown Savs. Ins.,
11 G. &.J. 114. Semmes v. Naylor, 12 G. & J. 358. Hall's Admr. v. Cress-
well, 12 G. & J 36. Carroll v. Bowie, 7 Gill, 34 Neptune Ins. Co. v.
Dorsey, 3 Md Ch. Dec. 334. Grove v. Brien, 1 Md. 438. Swan v. Patterson,
7 Md. 164. Peacock v. Pembroke, 8 Md. 350. Smith v. Anderson, 18 Md.
526. Groshon v, Thomas, 20 Md. 247. Martindale v. Brock, 41 Md. 571.
Crisfield v. State, 55 Md. 197.

1688, art. 8, sec. 6. 1860, art. 9, sec. 6. 1763, ch. 23, sec. 8.
1880, ch. 161, sec. 6.

6. When any person shall recover a judgment against the
principal debtor and surety, and the amount due on the judg-
ment shall be satisfied by the surety, the creditor or his attorney
of record shall assign the same to the surety, and such assign-
ment being filed in the court where the judgment was rendered,
the assignee shall be entitled to execution in his own name
against the principal for the amount so paid by the surety.

Ibid. sec. 7. 1860, art. 9, sec. 7. 1763, ch. 23, sec. 8. 1864, ch. 243.
1880, ch. 161, sec. 7.

7. When any judgment shall be rendered against several
sureties and the amount unpaid on said judgment shall be satis-
fied by said sureties or by any one of them, the plaintiff shall be
obliged to assign such judgment to the surety or sureties satis-
fying the same, who shall be entitled to execution in his or
their names against the other sureties in the judgment, for a
proportionable part of the said judgment so paid by the said
assignee; provided, that no defendant shall be precluded or
debarred of his remedy against the plaintiff, or his co-sureties
by audita querela, or other equitable course of proceedings.
McKnew v. Duvall, 45 Md. 501. Wilson v. Ridgely, 46 Md. 246

Ibid. sec. 8. 1864, ch. 243.

8. In any case where judgment shall be recovered by the
State against any principal debtor and a surety or sureties, and
said judgment shall be satisfied by said surety or sureties, the
same shall be entered by the attorney representing the State to
the use of the surety or sureties satisfying the same, on the