Seavy v. Bennett
Seavy v. Bennett
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
It is manifest that the execution issued June 10, 1879, was not at the instance or for the benefit of the plaintiffs in the judgment, but was the act of the clerk, and intended by him as the basis for an execution for costs against the plaintiffs, and it was not an execution in the meaning of § 2674 of the Code of 1880 (§2153 of Code of 1871), the date of which fixed the time from which to compute the seven years allowed for the issuance of another execution, Harris v. West, 25 Miss. 156.
The last preceding execution on such judgment was issued August 14, 1876, and, as more than seven years elapsed after that and before the commencement of this suit, it was barred.
Decree reversed and bill dismissed at the costs of the appellee in this court and the chancery court.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- A. C. Seavy v. J. W. Bennett
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Judgment. Statute of limitation. Whether affected by execution for clerk’s costs. Section 2674, Code of 1880, construed. An execution on a judgment against a defendant, issued by the clerk of the court of his own motion, and not at the instance, or for the benefit, of ’the plaintiff in the judgment, but as the basis for an execution for costs against the plaintiff, is not an execution the date of which fixes the time from which' to compute the seven years allowed for the issuance of another execution, under $ 2674, Code of 1880 ($ 2153, Code 1871), which provides that no execution shall issue on a judgment or decree “ after seven years from the date of the issuance of the last preceding execution on such judgment or decree.” Harris v. West, 25 Miss. 126, cited.