Case ID: tenn_1/html/0294-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

COBB vs. CONWAY.
    
      Equity. Bill to revive by Cobb’s heirs against Conway’s heirs. Demurrer, shewing for cause, that bill was abated, not having been revived within, two years. It had been more than two years since the death of the defendant, and no step taken.
    A suit in equity may be revived after a lapse of two terms, by a bill of revivor, but not by scire facias.
    Campbell in support of the demurrer.
    The case depends upon the construction of our acts of assembly; where an act points out a particular mode, it must be observed, and no other, 1785, c. 2 s. 2; 1789, c. 57, s. 7. Where the plaintiff dies, there is no necessity for a sci. fa. which is the exclusive method of reviving under this act. 1 Hay. 455. The intervention of a term, shall not work an abatement, 1 Hay. 500.
    
      Per Curiam. The act extends to such cases only, as could be revived before the passage of the act,and to none that died with the person.
    Campbell in continuation.
    The statute in providing a new method of proceeding, abolished the old. 1 Hay. 502, 162-3, from which it appears a bill of injunction was dismissed for want of a replication within two terms. If within two terms the plaintiffs representatives come in and prosecute the suit, there is no necessity for a bill of revivor. The case in 2 Haywood, 163, is nothing against us. It was in the case of a devise, where it was admitted a bill of revivor would lie. In the case of Lewis and Lenoir vs. Outlaw and others, at Knoxville, it was determined, as I have understood the case, that a sci. fa. was the only process that would lie in such a case. Admitting however, that a bill of revivor were proper, it ought to contain all the substance of the former bill, Mitf, 66. In the case of a devise, the substance of the former bill must be stated ; death, &c. by way of supplement. If the court can revive after two terms, they may after any length of time. Variance between a bill of revivor and original bill, is sufficient cause of demurrer. 1 Har. 156.
    White argued e contra.
   Per Curiam.

The mode pointed out in the act prevents an abatement for two terms; after this the case stands as if no act bad ever been passed. Within two terms, there may be no necessity for a bill of revivor, if the bill were served on the ancestor, as in the case of Lenoir and Lewis vs. Outlaw and als.— After the expiration of two terms, a revivor may take place in the same manner it does in England. Let the demurrer be overrule d, and the suit revived.