Case ID: njl_1/html/0239-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Cur.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PEARS AND ANOTHER v. BACHE, EXECUTOR OF RICHARDS.
    Where a judgment is of fifty years’ standing, a seire facias issued upon it, without permission of the court, will be quashed. The motion (o issue a scire facias is a motion of course, and no notice need be given to the opposite party.
    This was a motion to set aside a scire facias on a judgment. Judgment was obtained August 14th, 1741. May, 1791, a scire facias issued, returnable in this term, againeS the grantees in fee, not naming them. The judgment was thirty-four years antecedent to the grant, and fifty years before the first scire facias. It was contended by Leake, for the motion, that the proceedings were irregular and ought to be quashed.
   Per Cur.

Unanimously. Let the writ be quashed.

[207] Stockton moved instanter for leave to issue a sci. fa.

Leake and Aaron Ogden opposed'an absolute rule, and insisted it should be a rule to show cause. Bagnall v. Gray, 2 Bl. Rep. 1140; 2 Bl. Rep. 995, were cited.

They contended that notice to the ter-tenants was necessary, and that issuing the writ was not of course. It is analogous to the case of a warrant of attorney; the court will- presume the judgment to have been satisfied.

Stockton said it was a motion of course. Imp. C. P. 482.

Leake, contra, cited Imp. C. P. 484.

Stockton. The only notice required is after the writ has issued, in order to entitle plaintiff to execution.

Per Cur. Let the seirefacias issue.