Case ID: paige-ch_2/html/0102-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "The Chancellor", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Minthorne’s executors vs. Tompkins’ executors.
    Where the decree is full as to any branch of the cause, or as "to any of the. . parties thereto, it "must be enrolled before a deed can be executed on a sale under-the decree, and before an execution.-can be issued to enforce á per. formance of such decree.' , . .
    If the enrolment of any subsequent decree is. necessary, it is to-be; made by a continuance on the record of the first enrolment, . .
    March 20th.
   The Chancellor

decided that the-lllth rule "did not apply to the case of a sale under ah interlocutory order of the court; that in .such a case, the 'deed might be executed beforeenrolment. But-if the decree was final as to the whole subject matter of the sale, that it must be enrolled before any. conveyance could be executed ¡ although, as to other branches of the suit, another decree might be necessary before the cause was finally disposed of by the court. And that if a bill was dismissed with costs as to one defendant, the decree must be enrolled before any execution could issue thereon. And that the enrolment of any subsequent decree between other parties, or as to other matters, must be made by a continuance on the record of the first enrolment.