Winston v. Whitlocke
Court of Appeals of Virginia
Chapman Austin and Nathaniel Whitlocke gave a forthcoming bond to the plaintiffs in December 1796 : on which judgment was rendered against Austin alone; and, in April 1800, an execution issued, upon that judgment, returnable to the second day of June : which, as one of the bills of exceptions stated, was not returned.
Read the full summary
Chapman Austin and Nathaniel Whitlocke gave a forthcoming bond to the plaintiffs in December 1796 : on which judgment was rendered against Austin alone; and, in April 1800, an execution issued, upon that judgment, returnable to the second day of June : which, as one of the bills of exceptions stated, was not returned. In April 1801, a motion was made, upon the same bond, for judgment against Whitlocke; who offered to prove, by parol testimony, that the sheriff, in whose hands the above execution had been placed, had declared that he had actually levied the same upon some of Chapman’s hogs,…
1Opinion of the Court
Tucker, Judge.
Upon a joint and several bond, the plaintiff may proceed to take his judgment against the obligors severally; but he can have but one satisfaction.
The execution levied upon the goods of Austin might not have been sufficient to satisfy the plaintiff his whole debt; and he certainly might, in that case, have sued out another execution against Austin for the balance ; or he might have proceeded to obtain judgment and execution against the other party to the bond. For the misconduct of the sheriff, to which the plaintiff was not consenting, could not delay the *437plaintiff from his…
2Cited by2 opinions
- CSE, Inc. v. Kibby Welding, LLC and Tabitha KibbyCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 2023
- ZP NO. 332, LLC v. HUFFMAN CONTRACTORS, INC.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2026