Meze v. Howver
Supreme Court of Virginia
Mays & M’Clung recovered judgement against Meze, in the circuit court of Greenbrier, and thereupon sued out a fieri facias, on which they indorsed, that the judgment and execution were for the benefit of Howver. The sheriff levied the execution on the defendant’s property, and took a forthcoming bond from him, payable, not to the plaintiffs Mays & M’Clung, but to Howver.
Read the full summary
Mays & M’Clung recovered judgement against Meze, in the circuit court of Greenbrier, and thereupon sued out a fieri facias, on which they indorsed, that the judgment and execution were for the benefit of Howver. The sheriff levied the execution on the defendant’s property, and took a forthcoming bond from him, payable, not to the plaintiffs Mays & M’Clung, but to Howver. The bond was forfeited: and Howver moved the circuit court, in his own name, for judgment and award of execution upon it; and the court awarded execution accordingly. Meze applied to this court for a supersedeas, which was…
1Per curiam
The statute first provides, that all persons who recover judgment in any court of record, may, at their election, prosecute writs of fieri facias &c. and then, that if the owner of the goods (taken on a fi. fa.) shall give sufficient security to the sheriff to have the goods forthcoming at the day of sale, it shall be lawful for the sheriff to take a bond from the debtor and sureties, payable to the creditor, reciting &c. The creditor to whom the bond is to be made *443payable, is the person entitled to sue out the execution; the plaintiff on the record. No other person can be known to the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Hall v. WadsworthWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1891
- Waterman v. FrankSupreme Court of Missouri · 1855
- Paine v. TutwilerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1876
- Paine v. TutwilerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1876
- Paine v. TutwilerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1876