Case ID: miss_10/html/0471-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Mr. Justice ThacheR", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William R. Gresham, et al. vs. John A. Roberts’s Administrators.
    Iwo judgments were rendered in Copiah county, on each of which an execution was issued to Claiborne county, an abstract of neither judgment having been recorded in the latter county : Held, that the execution which came'first to the .hands of the sheriff, and was first levied, although issued on the junior judgment, was entitled to priority of lien.
    Error from the circuit court'of Copiah county.
    The facts are stated in the argument of Mr. Peyton, and the 'opinion of the court.
    
      E. G. Peyton, for the plaintiffs in error.
    The execution, in favor of James Andrews, issued on the 6th of May, 1841, and was received by the sheriff on the 10th of the same month, and was levied on the same day, on the properly sold by him.
    The execution, in favor of the plaintiffs in error, William R. Gresham, administrator, and Sarah Andrews, administratrix of the estate of Jameson Andrews, deceased, issued on the 17th of May, 1841, and was levied on the property on the 25th of the same month, being the same day on which it came to the sheriff’s hands. Both executions were levied on the same property, which was sold on the 7th day of June, 1841, for the sum of sixteen hundred and thirty dollars. This is a contest for the money made at the sale, under the above stated executions. The judgment in favor of the said William R. Gresham, administrator, and Sarah Andrews, administratrix, as aforesaid, was the first entered on the minutes of the court below, and therefore the eldest judgment in contemplation of law, and is entitled to the money made by virtue of the sale under said executions, according to the doctrine, established by this court, in the case of Smith & Pickett v. Ship, 1 Howard, 234.
   Mr. Justice ThacheR

delivered the opinion of the court.

A motion was made in the circuit court of Copiah county, to appropriate money made by executions.

Parties had obtained judgments against the same defendant, in Copiah county circuit court, at the same term, and the judgment of the plaintiffs in error was first entered upon the minutes of that court. James Andrews, one of the judgment creditors, issped his execution into Claiborne county, on the 6th day of May, 1841, which was received by the sheriff of that county, and levied on the property sold, on the 10th day of the same month. The plaintiffs in error, being also judgment creditors, issued their execution into Claiborne county, on the 17th day of May, 1841, which was received by the sheriff of that county, and levied on the property sold, on the 25th day of the same month. The court below ordered the amount levied to be applied to the first named execution, that, to wit, of James Andrews.

The case of Smith & Pickett v. Ship, 1 How. R. 234, is not applicable to the circumstances of this case. We must view it by examining the position and effect of the executions, upon their action in Claiborne county. The act of February 6, 1841, regulating the liens of judgments and decrees,” forbids any judgment liens to operate upon the property of a defendant, situated out of the county in which the judgment was rendered, until there be filed with the clerk of the circuit court of su'ch county an abstract of the judgment. The record does not show that this was done in either of the judgments mentioned in this case. It follows, therefore, that the execution which first came to the hands, and was first levied by the sheriff of Claiborne county, attained a priority by execution lien upon the property seized.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed.